Lemon dill sauce broke
Why are my sauces splitting?
Is RSA key size the size of private key exponent? I have implemented a key pair generation scheme for RSA algorithm. I have taken the length of private key exponent as RSA key size, but then I've got to know that RSA key size is the size of the modulus $n$. Is it wrong to take RSA key size as the size of the private key exponent?  To generate a private key of 1024 bits, I increase the size of private key exponent regardless the modulus $n$. "Like" versus "as" How can I reset my menus? $\newcommand{\Var}{\operatorname{Var}}$In this  is claimed that if the equation of errors in OLS is given by: $$u=y - X\beta$$ Then in the presence of heteroscedasticity the variance of $u$, will not be constant, $\sigma^2 \times I$, where $I$ is an identity matrix, but: $$\Var(u\mid X)=\sigma^2\Omega$$ In order to account for the heteroskedasticity, we can estimate the transform system, such that $P$ is a transformation matrix. $$Py=PX\beta-Pu$$ Where "the variance of a constant matrix $P$ times a random vector $u$" is: $$\Var(Pu\mid X)=P\Var(u\mid X)P'=P(\sigma^2\Omega)P'$$ Can somebody explain me the proof for that? Why does an environment's label have to appear after the caption? \documentclass{article} \usepackage{algorithm}  \begin{document} \setcounter{section}{54} \section{A section with no label} \begin{algorithm} \label{myalg} \caption{An algorithm with the label `myalg'.} \end{algorithm} Reference to myalg: \ref{myalg}. \end{document}   With this code, the reference givens 55 (the section number); if I move the label after the caption command, I get the correct reference (1).  Why should this be the case? I find it confusing: when thinking about an algorithm as an environment, you expect to be able to label it right after you began it. At the very least I would expect some kind of error or "??" to appear, rather than the previous environment or reference-able entity being used. After deleting all nodes, how do I reset the node ID to start from 1 again? I generated tons of dummy content for testing, and then deleted them all.  As nid is auto-increment, newly created node will have a nid of last created nid +1.  How can I make nid start from 1 again? How do I use '&' literally in LaTeX? I am moving from one job to another (postdoc to tenure track) this summer and I have papers in several stages of being written, these go from handwritten notes with all the necessary arguments to under revision at a journal. All the papers will have my new contact information put on them but where is the line for changing affiliation? It seems obvious to me that the one that is still in the handwritten notes stage will get the new affiliation and that the ones under revision won't. So somewhere in between is a line.   Where is it?  There are some similar questions so far (see  and  but they do not seem to be quite the same situation since I am not changing fields and the appointments are not concurrent. VLC Media Player Green Line I am using Ubuntu 14.10 64bit and the latest version of VLC media player, when I play a video (MP4, MKV AVI etc... it doesn't matter) at the bottom of the screen there is a green line It isn't an issue with my OS, YouTube, and the default media player work fine. Has anyone else had this issue? and if so is there a fix or is it just a software bug? $A$ is normal and nilpotent, show $A=0$ Given a matrix $A \in R^{n \times n}$ which is normal ($AA^H=A^HA$ where $A^H$ is hermitian of $A$) and nilpotent ($A^k=0$ for some $k$). Now we need to show that $A=0$. (This is essentially exercise 5(b) in sec. 80 on p.162 of Paul R. Halmos' Finite-Dimensional Vector Spaces.) I tried to show in the following way, we know that, $AA^H=A^HA$ pre-multiply by $A^{k-1}\implies A^kA^H=A^{k-1}A^HA$ Now, we have $0 = A^{k-1}A^HA$, since $A$ nilpotent. I am not sure how to proceed from here to show $A=0$. Can someone help me in this problem? Omission of the indefinite article to eliminate ambiguity love between husband and wife   What is the reason that there is no article (e.g. "love between a husband and a wife") in the above? Has some kind of a rule been identified grammatically when it comes to such a case? If I were to guess I think it's because the indefinite article 'a', the purpose of that, is taking a generic sample (or 'instance') from a 'class' (the class of husbands), but in the above sentence you want to refer to the class itself... the husband class and the wife class... and not an 'instance' of them, because it just is more to the point. Do you think this is a fair reasoning? Also, a thought came to me that with the use of the indefinite article, you get a generic husband and a generic wife, which, may not necessarily love each other (for they are not a specific pair of a specific husband and a specific wife who in fact love each other). zsh I/O redirection: redirecting and then piping; what is going on? How to influence the position of float environments like figure and table in LaTeX? How to influence the position of float environments like figure and table in LaTeX?   This is a general question and should collect useful answers for all users. I hope we can use this as a reference Where can I find information about ubuntu compatible or certified hardware/PC models? What's wrong with var x = new Array(); changed primary email in google account. how to log in? I added gmail to my google account. Now when i try to log into stack exchange using google it prompts me to create a new account instead of using the existing.   The google account is still the same but google changed the primary email adress.  How can i log in again? Can a character in the middle of a move action alter his movement based on a change in his surroundings? For example:      A player (speed 6) moves two squares towards a human bandit (pg. 162 MM) becoming adjacent to him, then proceeds to move around him to the right, provoking an opportunity attack. The bandit hits with his basic melee attack (+4 vs. AC; 1d8+1 damage, and the human bandit shifts 1 square), shifting one square to the left immediately.    This free shift makes it so that the PC would no longer flank the bandit at the END of his move. Can the player adjust his remaining three squares of movement so that he can once again flank the now-shifted bandit, or does he have to stick with his earlier movement designation?  This question boils down to: Is movement counted as you go, or do you say, "I am moving to here, it is within my range, and on the way to my destination 'blah' happens?" I bet the automatic response to my question would be "Bell's theorem" and of course I am not disputing Bell's proof. I am however uncertain of one of his assumptions.  The so called "no conspiracy" assumption states that we somehow posses this magical thing called free will which makes us able to break free from the causal chain of events that make us measure the $y$-axis instead of the $x$-axis and so on in experiments. Obviously this makes little sense once reviewed under the light of logic. What this naturally implies is that, if a theory is fully deterministic, it is instantly super-deterministic.  Simon Kochen and John Conway published a theorem in 2009, , which simply-put states: either everything is deterministic (super-deterministic) or every particle has free will.  Among the few who accept this to the fullest extent is Gerard 't Hooft. He has proposed that what we call sub-atomic particles are really just templates and that there is a realm beneath the quantum where the true fabric of reality is "hidden". By accepting determinism he escapes Bell's theorem (due to not having to accept the "no conspiracy" assumption) and can construct a local, deterministic and realist hypothesis of reality. In Gerard 't Hooft's model there is cellular automata somewhere near the Planck scale which gives rise to the "emergent quantum mechanics".  This means that there exist no superpositions in objective reality, the cat is always either dead or alive, no collapse of wave functions, no branching universes, non-locality or retro-causality.  The big question for me is basically: Why do people have such a hard time accepting determinism? Some will object and say "oh but it's SUPER-determinism", but that makes no sense whatsoever, either everything is determined (determinism) or only somethings are (quasi-determinism). By accepting it we escape Bell's theorem. Bell himself was well aware of this and mentioned it a few times in interviews in the 80's.  I know some are concerned that if we accept complete determinism we can no longer do science because it's all a HUGE CONSPIRACY. Gerard 't Hooft has answered critics who bring up this here: , section 6.  Additionally, another author who has taken a deeper look into the worries of "conspiracies" in QM interpretations is Peter J. Lewis in his paper  (also ).  So to all of you who dismiss local hidden variables I ask: Why? How to extract files to another directory using 'tar' command? I thought tar archive.tar /users/mylocation would work, but it doesn't. How can I do that? Is verifying ISOs downloaded from the official website worthwhile? I downloaded the ISO from , selecting the default "Ubuntu Desktop" option.  The website links the page  which gives instructions how to verify ubuntu.  This seems pretty tedious, and I am wondering how realistic it is that there is a problem with ISO downloaded from the official website. I note that the process of verification itself requires me to download software that is new to me, thus introducing another attack vector on me even as I am closing another one.  For what it's worth, I am planning to use Live USB only and not to fully install Ubuntu. Does that make a difference?