Eclipse does not want to run
Eclipse is not starting on Windows 7
How do I join two separate objects so I can edit them as one mesh? I'm making a call:  myResult = MakeMyCall(inputParams, out messages);   but I don't actually care about the messages.  If it was an input parameter I didn't care about I'd just pass in a null.  If it was the return I didn't care about I'd just leave it off.    Is there a way to do something similar with an out, or do I need to declare a variable that I will then ignore? I was getting the usual 4-8mbps in 12.04 when copying files via usb sticks. However after upgrading to 12.10, I only get 200-300kbps when I try to perform the same operation.   I have tried different usb sticks (which work flawlessly on Windows 7) and still experience the same issue. I experienced the same issue sometime ago on 11.10 but everything was normal when I upgraded to 12.04 so it might be a kernel issue.  Here's the output of dmseg |tail:      mysterio@mysterio-HP-Pavilion-dv6700-Notebook-PC:~$ dmesg |tail   [  871.023093] sdb: sdb1  [  871.026909] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] No Caching mode page present  [  871.026920] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through  [  871.026927] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk  [ 1036.226206] ISO 9660 Extensions: Microsoft Joliet Level 3  [ 1036.233561] ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A  [ 1086.342973] ISO 9660 Extensions: Microsoft Joliet Level 3  [ 1086.343010] ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A  [ 1173.971357] ISO 9660 Extensions: Microsoft Joliet Level 3  [ 1173.971441] ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A   I have updated my system with the latest updates. What could be wrong? How do I determine whether or not two lines intersect, and if they do, at what x,y point? How to prove $\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} (1+\frac1n)^n = e$? How can I prove the following?  $\gamma (t)$ is unit speed, $\dot \gamma(t) \not= 0 \Rightarrow \ddot \gamma(t)$ is perpendicular to $\gamma(t)$   I don't really see where a problem would arise when $\dot \gamma(t)=0$ would cause such a problem Proving that $S=\{\frac{1}{n}:n\in\mathbb{Z}\}\cup\{0\}$ is compact using the open cover definition Let $S=\{\frac{1}{n}:n\in\mathbb{Z}\}\cup\{0\}$ be a subset of $\mathbb{R}$. I have to prove using the open cover definition that this is compact. Could you help me, please? i install ubuntu and followed a guide to put 20gb in '/' and the rest (150gb) in '/home'. Now i just found out that a lot of the things installed in ubuntu usually goes to '/' instead of '/home'. I have a lot more things to install.  So what is the point of '/home' ? How do I fix this ? Should I transfer 150gb from '/home' to / ?  Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on udev            7.8G     0  7.8G   0% /dev tmpfs           1.6G  9.5M  1.6G   1% /run /dev/sda6        19G   16G  1.8G  91% / tmpfs           7.8G  676K  7.8G   1% /dev/shm tmpfs           5.0M  4.0K  5.0M   1% /run/lock tmpfs           7.8G     0  7.8G   0% /sys/fs/cgroup /dev/sda2        96M   29M   68M  31% /boot/efi /dev/sda8       159G  1.1G  150G   1% /home tmpfs           1.6G   56K  1.6G   1% /run/user/1000   what is /boot ? Its not '/' or '/home' Best way to soft brute-force your own GPG/PGP passphrase? Reading and searching long man pages Are there concerns with doing a generalized additive model with a smoothing term of multiple variables? In R, usually one performs a generalized additive model like so:  library(mgcv) x &lt;- gam(depvar ~ s(indvar1) + s(indvar2) + parametricvar)   Say I want to explore the non-parametric interaction of indvar1 and indvar2.  Is the following kosher?  x &lt;- gam(depvar ~ s(indvar,indvar2) + parametricvar) How can I classify data with the nearest-neighbor algorithm using Python? The question  only deals with flights in the US sourced from the  . Is there some similar source for EU, Asia etc? Drift velocity of electron Gradient borders Difference estimate & confidence intervals for $\chi^2$ test between 2 proportions I am using a chi-sq test between two proportions (). I am using this over the z-test for proportions because I do not think my data is normal.   My question is how do I get the difference (shift) estimate &amp; confidence intervals for this test.   For example,     Data1: 193/252=.77   Data2: 154/227=.68   P-value=.032 (I used the formula in the link above. I will also add my exact code below)  Shift Estimate: I assume its the difference between proportions, ie .77-.68=.09. Is this correct?   Confidence Interval: ??????????????????  Code for generating P-value (matlab):   % Pooled estimate of proportion  p0 = (n1+n2) / (N1+N2); % Expected counts under H0 (null hypothesis)  n10 = N1 * p0;  n20 = N2 * p0; % Chi-square test, by hand  observed = [n1 N1-n1 n2 N2-n2];  expected = [n10 N1-n10 n20 N2-n20];  chi2stat = sum((observed-expected).^2 ./ expected);  p = 1 - chi2cdf(chi2stat,1);  H=0; if(p&lt;.05), H=1; end Astronauts land on planet, met by aliens impersonating their deceased relatives When I was young, I read a chilling story of astronauts coming to an unknown planet and found to their delight  the occupants were all members of their family who were deceased. Each crew member goes off to their respective childhood homes to relive memories.   One astronaut however in the same bedroom as his brother suddenly wonders if aliens may have searched the memories of himself and fellow crew members and used this to gain power over the intruders. His brother asks suspiciously what he's thinking and doesn't believe the answer. The last scene shows astronauts being buried by aliens whose faces melt from human into something terrifying.   Anyone know the name of the story and author? I thought it might be something like Coming Home, but only a guess. Why doesn't a bike/bicycle fall if going with a high speed? When we find the electric field between the plates of a parallel plate capacitor we assume that the electric field from both plates is $${\bf E}=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_0}\hat{n.}$$ The factor of two in the denominator comes from the fact that there is a surface charge density on both sides of the (very thin) plates. This result can be obtained easily for each plate. Therefore when we put them together the net field between the plates is $${\bf E}=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_0}\hat{n}$$ and zero everywhere else. Here, $\sigma$ is the surface charge density on a single side of the plate, or $Q/2A$, since half the charge will be on each side.   But in a real capacitor the plates are conducting, and the surface charge density will change on each plate when the other plate is brought closer to it. That is, in the limit that the two plates get brought closer together, all of the charge of each plate must be on a single side. If we let $d$ denote the distance between the plates, then we must have $$\lim_{d \rightarrow 0}{\bf E}=\frac{2\sigma}{\epsilon_0}\hat{n}$$ which disagrees with the above equation. Where is the mistake in this reasoning?  Or more likely, do our textbook authors commonly assume that we are in this limit, and that this is why the conductor behaves like a perfectly thin charged sheet? Show that the congruence $x^{p-1} \equiv 1 \pmod {p^2}$ has precisely $p-1$ solutions modulo $p^2$ Let $p$ be a prime number. Show that the congruence $x^{p-1} \equiv 1 \pmod {p^2}$ has precisely $p-1$ solutions modulo $p^2$  I know the statment above is true for modulo $p$, but how is this imply to modulo $p^2$