How to add periodicity to condition?
How to plot periodic function's graphic?
Should I be offered the option to upgrade to 18.04.1? I understand that the first point release of Ubuntu 18.04, namely 18.04.1 is now available and that my system should now offer it as an update.  My current OS version is 16.04.5 LTS. In System Settings/Software and Updates I have set 'Notify me of a new Ubuntu version' to 'For long term support versions'. I have tried both the main server and the server for United Kingdom, neither offers an update when Software Updater is clicked or via the Ubuntu Software icon.  Can anyone please tell me why I don't get the option of updating to 18.04?  Edit:  I don't remember the details exactly, but I think that my last LTS point release update was offered automatically a lot sooner after the published release date than where we are now with 18.04.1.  Edit 10th August  It appears that there has been some problem with the update process and that it should be fixed next week, see:    Edit 14th August 18.04.1 LTS now available from UK server, Can players enchant items? I know that the DM can give you enchanted items, but can players spend gold and downtime to enchant their own? Simplify result of $\int_0^{\infty} \frac{1}{1+x^n}dx$ It is quite easy to show that (by using residue theorem) $$\int_0^{\infty} \frac{1}{1+x^n}dx = \frac{2 \pi i^{1+2/n}}{n(e^{2 \pi i / n} - 1)} $$ for $$n \ge 2$$  Is there any possibility to simplify $$\frac{2 \pi i^{1+2/n}}{n(e^{2 \pi i / n} - 1)}$$ or it is best result?  Thanks in advance! Left ideals of $M_n(K)$ Finding specific records of US WW2 veterans? How is the derivative of $\mbox{Trace}\left\{ X^T A X B\right\}$ with respect to matrix $X$ equal to $AXB + A^TXB^T$?  \begin{align}   \nabla_X \ \textrm{Trace}\left\{ X^T A X B\right\} = AXB + A^TXB^T \end{align}  where $A$ and $B$ matrices are given. This applies to all d20 systems, but with an example from the from the Pathfinder  (emphasis mine):  Stonecunning: Dwarves receive a +2 bonus on Perception checks to potentially notice unusual stonework, such as traps and hidden doors located in stone walls or floors. They receive a check to notice such features whenever they pass within 10 feet of them, whether or not they are actively looking.  In this case, does the GM roll the check in secret or ask the player roll the check? If the GM asks the player to roll for the check, what stops situations like:  GM: (interrupting) &quot;Gimli, Roll a perception check.&quot; Dwarf player: &quot;Oh, it's a natural one, I guess I don't see anything.&quot; Human player: &quot;Okay, I'll roll a perception check for anything unusual in this room. Nice! 19. How about 19, does 19 work for you?&quot; GM: &quot;Gimli, everything looks kosher to you. Aragon, you notice a rock coloured tarp on the ground here, covering what looks like a pit trap.&quot;  In this case, by telling the dwarf to roll his &quot;free&quot; perception check, he's telegraphed to the players that there is something to notice. How can this be fixed, without bluffing checks for nothing in particular to throw off the signal to noise ratio of similar checks? How to define a command that takes more than 9 arguments How permanent magnets work?Are they working with motion of electrons? Grammar of "supposed to": part of speech / word class, active or passive? If I say     I'm supposed to go.   Is supposed to here an adjective in a passive construction? How to get only filename using sed How can I get only the filename using sed? I've this  out_file=$(echo $in_file|sed "s/\(.*\.\).*/\1mp4/g")   But I get the path too /root/video.mp4, and I want only video.mp4. Why does shell Command Substitution gobble up a trailing newline char? Installed Teamviewer using a 64-bit system, but I get a dependency error Multiplication of matrices &mdash; taking the dot product of the $i$th row of the first matrix and the $j$th column of the second to yield the $ij$th entry of the product &mdash; is not a very intuitive operation: if you were to ask someone how to mutliply two matrices, he probably would not think of that method. Of course, it turns out to be very useful: matrix multiplication is precisely the operation that represents composition of transformations. But it's not intuitive. So my question is where it came from. Who thought of multiplying matrices in that way, and why? (Was it perhaps multiplication of a matrix and a vector first? If so, who thought of multiplying them in that way, and why?) My question is intact no matter whether matrix multiplication was done this way only after it was used as representation of composition of transformations, or whether, on the contrary, matrix multiplication came first. (Again, I'm not asking about the utility of multiplying matrices as we do: this is clear to me. I'm asking a question about history.) Julian day of the year in Java List comprehension rebinds names even after scope of comprehension. Is this right? $F$ closed and connected then... Let $F\subset X$ be a closed and connected subset of the metric space $(X,d)$ then for every pair of points $a, b\in F$ and each $\epsilon&gt;0$ there are points $a=z_0,z_1,\ldots z_n=b$ in $F$ such that $d(z_{k-1}-z_k)&lt;\epsilon$ for $1\leq k\leq n$.  Is the hypothesis that $F$ is closed needed? Is it bad to defrag a ssd? Or just pointless? I've read on some websites that it's bad to defrag an ssd. But I'm reading on this website now and one person was like "You didnt do any harm its just not necessary to defrag it." I feel like that's wrong since every other website I've read says it will damage the ssd. Why are integer literals with leading zeroes interpreted strangely? This prints 83  System.out.println(0123)   However this prints 123  System.out.println(123)   Why does it work that way? I'm working on exercises from Kunen and I'm stuck. I must proof that the following are equivalent:   There exists a sequence $\langle A_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(A_\alpha\subset\alpha)$ and for all $A \subset \omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:A\cap\alpha=A_\alpha\}$ is stationary. ($\diamondsuit$-principle) There exists a sequence $\langle A_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(A_\alpha\subset\alpha\times\alpha)$ and for all $A \subset \omega_1\times\omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:A\cap\alpha\times\alpha=A_\alpha\}$ is stationary. There exists a sequence $\langle f_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(f_\alpha:\alpha\rightarrow\alpha)$ and for all $f : \omega_1\rightarrow\omega_1$ $\exists\alpha(f|\alpha=f_\alpha\wedge\alpha&gt;0)$ There exists a sequence $\langle f_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(f_\alpha:\alpha\rightarrow\alpha)$ and for all $f : \omega_1\rightarrow\omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:f|\alpha=f_\alpha\}$ is stationary.   I have proved that $1\implies 2\implies 4\implies 3$ and that $4\implies 1,$ but I'm having problems on proving that $3\implies$ "something", because it only talks about one $\alpha$. Can someone help me?