"The place where is near my apartment" - Why can't we use 'where' there?
Relative pronouns "where" and "when": where can they be omitted?
It says that Cognito Forms can send email notifications when a form is submitted. Where would I find those email notification settings?   I would like for my website clients to be the recipients of those email notifications. Do they have to have an account or a verified email address?   Also, is the form data included in the email notification? Also, is there an advantage to using the WordPress Plugin vs the regular embed code? Dublin transit visa requirements for Indian citizens Dual boot Ubuntu (14.04) with Windows 10 Prove that if $A$ is an infinite set then $A \times 2$ is equipotent to $A$ I want to prove that if $A$ in an infinite set, then the cartesian product of $A$ with 2 (the set whose only elements are 0 and 1) is equipotent to $A$.  I'm allowed to use Zorn's Lemma, but I can't use anything about cardinal numbers or cardinal arithmetic (since we haven't sotten to that topic in the course).  I read a proof of the fact that if $a$ is an infinite cardinal number, then $a+a=a$, which is something similar to what I want to prove.   Any suggestions will be appreciated :) Let $p, q \in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $\|p\| = \|q\| = 1$ and define $$A = pq^T + qp^T$$ Find the null space of $A$.    I am not having very much luck. I have managed to show that $p + q$ and $p - q$ are eigenvectors, but I can't seem to connect those two. I know that since $A$ is generated by an outer product, it is of rank one. That implies that the rank of the null space is $n - 1$, but I can't seem to get any further. Can anyone help? When I try to install any package through the command line, I get an error.   $ sudo apt-get install &lt;package&gt; Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree        Reading state information... Done E: Unable to locate package &lt;package&gt;   Can anyone help me on this? Factor analysis and regression Batch update/delete EF5 In the Deadpool movie when Wade his mutant cells get activated, his skin changes so he looks like Freddy Krueger (As Weasel referred too). But he obtains healing abilities and his cancer gets cured because of it. He's become an immortal person which can heal any wound super fast.  What I don't understand is, why doesn't his skin heal so he would look like before? I remember that Francis (or Ajax) said that it's a 'side-effect' of mutating, but why wouldn't it heal when he has a healing ability? Sphere inside a conical vessel touches the lid Java - Splitting a CSV file into an Array Style every four posts differently How to create and animate the water reflection (Caustics) on an object? What is the best method to create this kind of reflection and how to animate it? I'm on SO pretty much every day researching something to do with programming, and over the last month or two, I find I'm growing frustrated and a little disgusted at how many interesting questions have been closed as "not a good fit" or "too subjective".  I think there is a confusion between "subjective" and "calls for judgement". To me one of the most valuable things about SO is the tremendous breadth and depth of experience of the members, and experience translates into smart decisions and advice, and that advice cannot always be asked for, or expressed in terms of, bald facts and data.  It's going to be 'subjective'.  I don't think SO should be Wikipedia. I think that if I could ask a question to a group of skilled programmers sitting around a table at lunch, and get interesting, valuable answers, then I don't care whether the question or the answers are 'subjective', I think that question should equally well be fair game for Stack Overflow.  I would like to see a mechanism whereby people who vote to close a question lose reputation when somebody expresses interest in that question or its responses.  How can I, or can I, influence this aspect of SO? How can an uneducated but rational person differentiate between science and religion? I recently found myself unable to respond to the statement "But the big bang theory is just another creation myth!" during a science vs. religion argument. I found it very difficult to explain the difference between the big bang theory and creation myths without going through a crash course in Newtonian and then Relativistic mechanics.   This had me thinking of the following scenario: Consider a person who for various reasons never got a formal education beyond basic reading and writing. He/She doesn't know any science or math, and was never exposed to any scientific reasoning and experiments. She/He is however an open minded, level headed, and rational person (I've met more than one such person myself).   How would such a person differentiate science from religion? As far as he/she is concerned science has the exact same structure as religion:    A hard to understand scripture: Science treatises and journal papers.  An ordained clergy with a high entry barrier: Doctors, professors, scientists, etc... Seemingly arbitrary injunctions against certain behaviors: "Don't smoke", "Don't pollute",.... Various metaphysical (from his/her perspective) claims about the world around us: The big bang, other galaxies, blackholes, quarks,... Organizations which control and oversee doctrine: The FDA, The NIH, The NFS,...   From his/her perspective, all of these characteristics are no different than the way organized religion presents itself as being the source of truths about the world.   In particular if such a person were to heed the advice of the :         Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing (anussava),   nor upon tradition (paramparā),   nor upon rumor (itikirā),   nor upon what is in a scripture (piṭaka-sampadāna)   nor upon surmise (takka-hetu),   nor upon an axiom (naya-hetu),   nor upon specious reasoning (ākāra-parivitakka),   nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over (diṭṭhi-nijjhān-akkh-antiyā),   nor upon another's seeming ability (bhabba-rūpatāya),   nor upon the consideration, The monk is our teacher (samaṇo no garū) Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these   things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise;   undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,"   enter on and abide in them.'      Following the Buddha's advice (ironically himself a religious figure), such a rational but uneducated person would have just as much reason to doubt the various results of scientists as to doubt the dogmas of organized religion.    How would it be possible for such a person to distinguish scientific facts from religious dogma?  How can we convince such a person of the validity of ideas like those of modern cosmology or evolutionary biology, without first having to teach them enough biology and physics to understand those concepts? Monotone functions and non-vanishing of derivative What is the iOS alternative to a radio button? Converting a year from 4 digit to 2 digit and back again in C# My credit card processor requires I send a two-digit year from the credit card expiration date. Here is how I am currently processing:   I put a DropDownList of the 4-digit year on the page. I validate the expiration date in a DateTime field to be sure that the expiration date being passed to the CC processor isn't expired. I send a two-digit year to the CC processor (as required). I do this via a substring of the value from the year DDL.   Is there a method out there to convert a four-digit year to a two-digit year. I am not seeing anything on the DateTime object. Or should I just keep processing it as I am? $\prod_{k=0}^{\infty} \cos(x \cdot 2^{-k}).$ Task is to find $$\prod_{k=0}^{\infty} \cos(x \cdot 2^{-k}).$$  I tried to make it with double-angle formula: $\prod_{k=0}^{\infty} \cos(x \cdot 2^{-k}) = \frac{\prod_{k=0}^\infty \sin(x2^{1-k})}{2^\infty \cdot \prod_{k=0}^\infty \sin(x \cdot 2^{-k})} $ I'm sad to admit, that I'm stuck with that one. So I would appreciate any help, such as pointing the right direction. Can a class overload methods that also exist in the publicly inherited interface? It seems like this is unambiguous and useful, but compilers (VC, Intel, GCC) all complain, at least by my construction. Below is a toy example. The inherited rebound() function has two clear overloads, yet this will not compile.  If you rename the rebound() method in either class, it works fine, but if they share the same member function name (even though they're overloaded with different argument types!) you get a fatal error of "too few arguments to function call."  The workaround is trivial (I'll just rename the methods) but I'm just trying to understand if this is a C++ restriction (and why it would be).   #include  class Bound { public:   Bound() : x0(0.0), x1(0.0) {};   Bound(double x) : x0(x), x1(x) {};   double width() const {return x1-x0;}   void rebound(const Bound *a, const Bound *b); private:   double x0, x1; };  void Bound::rebound(const Bound *a, const Bound *b) {   if (a && b) {     x0=std::min(a->x0, b->x0);     x1=std::max(a->x1, b->x1);   } }  class Node : public Bound { public:   Node(double x) : Bound(x), left(0), right(0) {};   Node(Node *a, Node *b) : left(a), right(b) {rebound();}   void rebound() { rebound(left, right); } private:   Node *left;   Node *right; };   int main() {   Node A(1.0);   Node B(2.0);   Node C(&A, &B); }