How do I change background of login screen?
Cannot change lock screen background on Ubuntu 18.04
Find $\space\ \begin{align*} \lim_ {x \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{\log_{2}(x-1)}{x}\right]   \end{align*}$.   After some minutes around this limit I did it this way:  $\log_{2}(x-1)=y \Leftrightarrow 2^y=x-1$  So,$\space x=2^y+1$.  When $x \to +\infty$,$\space y \to +\infty$ also. By substitution:  $\begin{align*} \lim_ {y \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{\log_{2}(2^y+1-1)}{2^y+1}\right]=\lim_ {y \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{\log_{2}(2^y)}{2^y+1}\right]=\end{align*}$  $\begin{align*}\lim_ {y \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{y}{2^y+1}\right]=\lim_ {y \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{1}{\frac{2^y+1}{y}}  \right]=\lim_ {y \to+\infty} \left [ \frac{1}{\frac{2^y}{y}+\frac{1}{y}}\right]= \frac{1}{+\infty+0}=0  \end{align*}$  Is this correct?Are there any other easy way to find this limit?Thanks strange character replacement on SO I added a comment to  but something strange is happening. The end code reads "); but SO decided to change that to ";);.    I did not add a ; in front of the ).  To further explain what's happening here, the following:  "http://example.com/." http://example.com/. "http://example.com." http://example.com. "http://example.com" http://example.com   renders as: Lately I see a blue screen of death a lot and want to know why it appears. Where should I gather the information so the problem can be diagnosed best? Couldn't find anything in C:\Windows\Logs. When speaking precisely or technically, one would say that "Homo erectus and homo sapiens are two species of hominid" rather than "Homo erectus and homo sapiens are two species of hominids." The hominid here should be singular because we are speaking about instances of a single class ("class" being used here in its broader sense, not in the sense of taxonomic grouping).  Now let's consider more common parallel constructions replacing the word species with other words.      Tide and Wisk are two brands of detergent.       Tide and Wisk are two brands of detergents.      Cats and dogs are two types of pet you can buy at Pets-R-Us.       Cats and dogs are two types of pets you can buy at Pets-R-Us.   I feel that using the singular noun to specify the class is more grammatically correct, but sounds stilted in conversation. Almost everyone I hear making these constructions uses the plural form. What are your thoughts about singular vs. plural here?  Edit  Here's a more extreme example that may help clarify the issue. Consider the following sentence:     It was my first attempt at calming an angry crowd, and I just        stood there while people were hurling all kinds of insults at me.   Here I think the singular insult sounds strange, if not downright wrong.  Further Edit  I just noticed in A Treasury for Word Lovers (Morton S. Freeman, 1983) a section entitled "Types of Errors." This is a book about (American) English usage by an English professor and editor, which purports to be a "practical guide for serious writers and readers." I wish I could say this discovery satisfies the question, but in fact I now feel somewhat farther from the truth, if there is any single "truth" in this matter. But at least I don't have to worry about being wrong when using the plural form of the class in these constructions. Change desktop background to a solid color (e.g. pitch black) in GNOME 3 Uk Visa Refused need guidelines etc,,, Undergraduate classical mechanics introduces both Lagrangians and Hamiltonians, while undergrad quantum mechanics seems to only use the Hamiltonian. But particle physics, and more generally quantum field theory seem to only use the Lagrangian, e.g. you hear about the Klein-Gordon Lagrangian, Dirac Lagrangian, Standard Model Lagrangian and so on. Why is there a mismatch here? Why does it seem like only Hamiltonians are used in undergraduate quantum mechanics, but only Lagrangians are used in quantum field theory? Why is the asterisk before the variable name, rather than after the type? Why do most C programmers name variables like this:  int *myVariable;   rather than like this:  int* myVariable;   Both are valid. It seems to me that the asterisk is a part of the type, not a part of the variable name. Can anyone explain this logic? Remove all content using pure JS In Python, how do I determine if an object is iterable? After upgrading to Ubuntu 14.04 from 12.04 I have duplicate entries in dash.    How can I get rid of them? I'm looking for a good way to perform multi-row inserts into an Oracle 9 database.  The following works in MySQL but doesn't seem to be supported in Oracle.  INSERT INTO TMP_DIM_EXCH_RT  (EXCH_WH_KEY,   EXCH_NAT_KEY,   EXCH_DATE, EXCH_RATE,   FROM_CURCY_CD,   TO_CURCY_CD,   EXCH_EFF_DATE,   EXCH_EFF_END_DATE,   EXCH_LAST_UPDATED_DATE)  VALUES     (1, 1, '28-AUG-2008', 109.49, 'USD', 'JPY', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'),     (2, 1, '28-AUG-2008', .54, 'USD', 'GBP', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'),     (3, 1, '28-AUG-2008', 1.05, 'USD', 'CAD', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'),     (4, 1, '28-AUG-2008', .68, 'USD', 'EUR', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'),     (5, 1, '28-AUG-2008', 1.16, 'USD', 'AUD', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'),     (6, 1, '28-AUG-2008', 7.81, 'USD', 'HKD', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008', '28-AUG-2008'); In Fringe's season 1, the episode  (1x13) shows how  travels on VertusAir flight 718. We witness how he develops some strange symptoms, withdraws into a lavatory and transforms into a porcupine-like monster.  At the end of season 3, Peter "switches" the timeline (changing the past and making the present continue in a different timeline henceforth) from blue- to orange-verse. Various statements throughout the 4th season indicate time (the date) was not reset; Olivia and Walter have been working on Fringe cases for some three years etc. - hence it is safe to say that season 4 plays 3 years after season 1.  Then, in the episode  (4x16), the events from 1x13 happen again, up to the point of Bowman's transformation, which this time doesn't happen (not aboard the plane, anyway). As far as I can tell, great care was taken to exactly recreate the events from the season 1 episode, including hiring the same actors to play the flight attendants once again ( and ), so obviously this is supposed to be the same event with slight changes.  Peter, as well as Olivia - who is in the process of regaining her memories from the blue-verse -, remember the events from 1x13 and note the difference that Bowman's transformation happened later this time, implying that in the orange-verse, everything related to flight 718 played out the same way, except for the small difference that the transformation happened a bit later.  BUT ... all of this happened 3 years later!! Is there any explanation for this?  How unlikely is it that in the orange-verse timeline, Marshall Bowman is on the very same flight with the very same flight attendants 3 years after the same would have happened in the blue-verse? Mind you, this is not a "small change" in the course of events while mostly everything else stays the same.  So, why did Peter and Olivia realize the transformation happened a tad later in the orange-verse timeline, but were not baffled by the fact that essentially the same events as in the blue-verse happened, but three years later?  EDIT: Not only the flight and the flight attendants were the same in both episodes. The passenger next to Bowman was the same, an elderly lady played by  both times, as well. Moreover, the transcripts of  and  reveal that the dialogue between Bowman, the passenger next to him, and the cabin crew is the same down to the lines of text until the moment of transformation.  Interestingly, the announcement by the captain in the beginning seems to be different - starting the inflight movie + selling headsets vs. circling before beginning the final descent + selling snacks. On the other hand, this could be presumed to be a slight retcon, as in 4x16, it was crucial for the plot that the plane would be close to landing, and starting the inflight movie would not make much sense right before landing. I'm reading Baby Rudin and exercise 28 of chapter 2 reads "Prove that every closed set in a separable metric space is the union of a (possibly empty) perfect set and a set which is at most countable." I don't understand why the set must be closed in order for this to be true.  My proof is as follows, and I don't make any reference to the closedness of the set:  Let $E$ be a set in a separable metric space.  Let $B$ be a countable base of that metric space.  Let $P$ be the set of condensation points of $E$.  I claim that $P$ is perfect and $E-P$ is at most countable.  If $p$ is a limit point of $P$, then every neighborhood of $p$ includes at least one point $q$ of P.  For a neighborhood $N_{p}$ of $p$, choose a neighborhood $N_{q} \subset N_{p}$ of $q$.  Since $q$ is a condensation point of $E$, uncountably many points of $E$ are in $N_{q}$, and thus in $N_{p}$.  So $p\in P$ and $P$ is closed.  If $p \in P$, then $p$ is a condensation point of $E$, so every neighborhood $N_{p}$ of $p$ must include uncountably many points of $E$.  If $p$ is not a limit point of $P$, then there exists a neighborhood $N_{p}$ of $p$ such that $N_p$ includes no condensation points of $E$ except for $p$.  This means that every point $q\in N_{p}-\{p\}$ must have a neighborhood $N_{q}$ that does not have uncountably many points of $E$.  For each $b_{k}\in B \cap \mathscr{P}(N_{p})$, choose such a neighborhood $N_{q_{k}} \supset b_{k}$ of some point $q\in N_{p}-\{p\}$.  Now $\{N_{q_{k}}\}$ covers $N_{p}$, and $\bigcup_{k=1}^{\infty}N_{q_{k}}\supset N_{p}$ has at most countably many points of $E$, for it is a union of countably many sets that have at most countably many points of $E$.  This contradicts the assumption that $p\in P$.  So $P$ is perfect.  Let $S=E-P$. There are no condensation points in $S$.  So there exists an open cover $\{N_s\}$, where each $N_s$ is a neighborhood of $s \in S$ with at most countably many elements of $S$. For each $b_{k}\in B \cap \mathscr{P}(S)$, choose such a neighborhood $N_{s_{k}} \supset b_{k}$ of some point $s\in S$.  Then we have a countable subcover $\{N_{p_{k}}\}$ of $S$. As $N_{p_{k}} \cap S$ is at most countable for all $k$, $S$ must be at most countable.  So what am I doing wrong?  Or is Rudin's assumption of closedness extraneous? Replace a string in a text file using a shell script not working properly I have a text file containing this:  0 0 -1 0 1 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1.5 0.0 1.0 1   and I want to replace the 1.0 to 2.0 so that it becomes:  0 0 -1 0 1 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1.5 0.0 2.0 1   so I use this command:  sed -i 's/'1.0'/'2.0'/g' /home/user1/file1.txt   or this:  sed -i 's/1.0/2.0/g' /home/user1/file1.txt   but this is the result that appears and I don't know how to fix this:  0 0 -2.0 2.0 0 0 0 -2.0 0 1.5 0.0 2.0 1 The question of  made me wonder as to whether wizards, any of them, do practice religion. Whether there be magic-person only religions or shared muggle faiths, I do not recall any wizards (born in the wizard world anyway) saying that they did practice a religion.  Many of them do celebrate Christmas, but as was commented on the above linked question, there are many non-christian muggles that also observe Christmas. So I am not sure that can be an accurate identifier. Answering this question may link into identifying . StandardSetController with History records Checking to see if a user has a licence for a managed package So I'm aware that there is a method on UserInfo called isCurrentUserLicensed which lets you check if the user running the code has a licence for a namespace that you specify, i.e. for a particular managed package.  What I want to know is whether there is a way I can test to see if some other user (assume I have their ID) has a licence for a particular package. Has anybody found a way to do this? ON an American street, but IN a British one. Do the twain ever meet? Why do we think of light as a wave? I've read that light travels in a straight line and has a wavelength of 400nm to 700nm. But I don't understand why does it have a wavelength and what creates its wavelength? I agree with the concept of sound which also has wavelength, thus called sound waves which are created by the vibrational movement in air. I'm not aware of calling light a wave. Does the light vibrate too? If so, then how?