What do you call someone who is not materialistic?
Someone who does not like excess
When we refer to a house that belongs to a family, we say "family's house". Pluralizing family gives us "families". Referring to the houses of several families, we say "families' houses". Forming the plural possessive in such a case is rather simple.  I encountered a more complex use of this recently - referring to a single house owned by a single family in a set of houses owned by a set of families.  We can say "the families' houses" to refer to all of the houses owned by all of the families.  We can say "one of the families' houses" to refer to one of the houses owned by one or more of the families. In this context, "one of" applies to "the families' houses".  If we were instead to apply "one of" to "the families", and want to refer to the one house owned by "one of the families", how would this be written?  My first though was "one of the families's house", taking "one of the families" as a single noun and appending 's to it. This looks (and sounds) a bit strange, though. "One of the families' house" and "one of the family's house"/"one of the family's houses" seem wrong to me, and I can't really determine the correct way to say/write this.  Is there a definitively correct way that this should be written?  EDIT: To clarify, although I think I made it clear, in this context, there are several families, and each owns one house. The goal of the sentence is to refer to one of those houses without stating which specific house. Example: "The players and their families want to celebrate their team's victory; this will likely entail a party at one of the families's house". Story about human space explorers who run into alien telepath space crew I read a short story in an anthology around 1998 (the book could have been older than that) which went like this - A human space exploration scientific crew is exploring an alient planet (peaceful planet, as I recall) when they run into an alien spaceship (from a different planet which also happened to be there) - the aliens were telepaths.   The alien commander and first officer discuss the earthlings after a meeting and realize that the human crew are the descendants of a species (Banthu/Klanthu/Zantha, something like that) which had tried to violently take over the galaxy some 20/30/50,000 years ago and which had been beaten back by the combined might of the rest of the galaxy. They had supposedly been eliminated but they somehow managed to survive and are back in space only a few thousand years after they were completely beaten (which is something the aliens are amazed by).   The alien commander kills the human explorers via telepathy but realizes that there is no information available to locate their home planet and speculate that they will be meeting again soon given the past history of the humans.  I vaguely think there was also a fantasy short by L Sprague de Camp in the same anthology, but can't be 100% sure. Any thoughts/ideas? Thanks! Is there a geometric reason why two merging black holes never “decay” into two separate black holes All black hole mergers seem to result in one Kerr black hole after ring-down.   Could it be possible, that two initial black holes with two separate event horizons form an “intermediate compound state” with one event horizon, which - at a later time - “decays” in two final black holes?  I know that the answer to this question is “no” when applying Bekenstein-Hawking entropy where the decay would violate the second law which postulates $dA/dt &gt; 0$.   And the answer seems to be “no” when relying on numerical relativity for black hole mergers.  My question is if there is a more elegant, geometrical proof following entirely from general relativity, which rules out such a decay.  Thanks Let $D = B(0,1) \subset \mathbb{C} $ a disc, $f$ holomorphic on $D$. I want to demonstrate that if $$ 2|f^{'}(0)| = \sup_{z, w \in D} |f(z)-f(w)|$$  then $f$ is linear.   I know this is a well-known result. Where can I find the proof ? A continuous mapping is determined by its values on a dense set Real Numbers Raised to Imaginary Powers? What is a real number to the power of an imaginary or complex number? e.g. 3i. I have searched through sites about imaginary numbers, but none seem to say anything about imaginary indices. Examples and explanations would be appreciated. Proof Check: Every Cauchy Sequence is Bounded On webmail every user gets error "ERROR: Message not sent. Server replied: 354" while sending mails.   But mails are sent properly and reaches properly.  Can you tell me where is problem, and why it is occurred?  UPDATE: I found in some resources that this is not an error but standard information message. On the other side, it's annoying. Can you tell me if it is a true, and if it is how can I avoid it? I have an alpha version of Ubuntu.  When the stable version is released do I have to upgrade or is it already stable from the installed updates? Why can't energy be created or destroyed? My physics instructor told the class, when lecturing about energy, that it can't be created or destroyed.  Why is that?  Is there a theory or scientific evidence that proves his statement true or false?  I apologize for the elementary question, but I sometimes tend to over-think things, and this is one of those times. :) Possible Duplicate:          I am always confused with the prepositions to use when indicating an event happening at a place. Should I use "at" or "in" or "on"?  For example:     We had our dinner at the McDonalds at/in the shopping centre at/on Sixth   Avenue.   The McDonalds restaurant is in the shopping centre. The shopping centre is located at Sixth Avenue. So am I right to say "the McDonalds in the shopping centre at Sixth Avenue"?  Now, what if it was a street instead of an avenue? Say for example:     We had our dinner at the McDonalds at/in the shopping centre at/on Coral Street.   Here, somehow, I find it natural to say "the McDonalds at the shopping centre on Coral Street".  How do I determine the right prepositions to use? And how would the different prepositions give different meanings to the sentence? If $\sum_{n_0}^{\infty} a_n$ diverges prove that $\sum_{n_0}^{\infty} \frac{a_n}{a_1+a_2+...+a_n} = +\infty $ I've tried to use the limit test: $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{a_n}{b_n} = C$ in the series of $a_n$ and $\frac{a_n}{a_1+a_2+...+a_n}$ but it was inconclusive.  The question does not especify the sign of $a_n$ but proving it for positives would already help.  I think the sign can change as long as the partial sums never get to be zero. Like if the series has only negative numbers the result seems to stil hold. No hair theorem for black holes and the baryon number So I am on Minecraft playing on my friends world (Not server). However, they won't go online for no reason. I want to go continue my work on that world and not start brand new on survival again. I've already made a lot of progress and would not like to lose it, can somebody help? I've already tried to get answers but they are either too complicated or for servers like IP. How does the color of a car influence its inner temperature change over time when parked outside in windless, hot and sunny regions?  I know what's the common idea about that: black cars are supposed to build up high temperatures faster because black objects absorb radiations instead of reflecting them off. Is it true? And then, what happens during the steady state? Some claim the black car will stay hotter, some others claim it will be the same whatever the color. Do all cars have the same temperature inside in the long run, or are some of them hotter?  I've Googled it but the best I could find was . It claims to be based upon ~20 articles. But there's not even a mention of absorption or emission spectrums. A priori, a black car could absorb all visible radiations and emit it as infrared while reflecting all of the Sun's infrared. And it's still only qualitative. I've found nothing on Physics stackexchange, the closest being . "Email" or "e-mail"? Which way of writing the word: "Email" or "e-mail" is correct? Both variants seem to be in wide use. If both ones are okay, maybe there is a difference in contexts they have been used (one is more formal than the other)? Let $\mathbb{F}_{27}$ denote the finite field of size 27. For each $\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{27}$ , define $ A_{\alpha}$ $=$ { $ 1, 1+\alpha , 1+\alpha+{\alpha}^2 , 1+\alpha+{\alpha}^2+{\alpha}^3 , .... $} . Then  prove that  the number of  $\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{27}$ such that $|A_\alpha|$=26 equals 12.  $ 0\in A_\alpha $ if and only if $\alpha\neq 0$ For the first proof , the multiplicative group of the field $\mathbb{F}_{27}$ is cyclic and its order is 26  , so there are 12 generators in that group.   Now  I need  to  show  that  $ 1+\alpha+{\alpha}^2+.. {\alpha}^{25} $ =0  , where order of $\alpha$=26 . Since   $\alpha ^{26}$ =1 ($\alpha$-1)(1+$\alpha$+${\alpha}^2$+...+${\alpha}^{25}$)=0 , since $\alpha\neq 1$  , So $ 1+\alpha+...+{\alpha}^{25} $ =0 My question is , can I write these last two  lines?  I mean are those two lines alright to write? If those two lines are invalid then I need some help to show  $ 1+\alpha+{\alpha}^2+..+{\alpha}^{25} $=0  .Thanks Prove $$\det(e^A) = e^{\operatorname{tr}(A)}$$ for all matrices $A \in \mathbb{C}_{n×n}$. Gravity as a gauge theory Currently, (classical) gravity (General Relativity) is NOT a gauge theory (at least in the sense of a Yang-Mills theory).   Why should "classical" gravity be some (non-trivial or "special" or extended) gauge theory? Should quantum gravity be a gauge theory?  Remark: There are some contradictory claims in the literature to this issue. To what extent gravity is "a gauge" theory?Obviously, GR is not a YM theory. So, why do some people say that gravity "IS" a gauge theory? I found this question relevant, e.g., then we handle GR in the Einstein-Cartan theory or any other theory beyond GR, like teleparallel theories or higher-derivative gravitational theories. So I think it could be useful to discuss the "gauge flavor" of gravity here. How to replace plain URLs with links? I am using the function below to match URLs inside a given text and replace them for HTML links. The regular expression is working great, but currently I am only replacing the first match.  How I can replace all the URL? I guess I should be using the exec command, but I did not really figure how to do it.  function replaceURLWithHTMLLinks(text) {     var exp = /(\b(https?|ftp|file):\/\/[-A-Z0-9+&amp;@#\/%?=~_|!:,.;]*[-A-Z0-9+&amp;@#\/%=~_|])/i;     return text.replace(exp,"&lt;a href='$1'&gt;$1&lt;/a&gt;");  }