Booting into Ubuntu after booting into Windows
Windows 8 removes Grub as default boot manager
formatting long numbers as strings in python What is an easy way in Python to format integers into strings representing thousands with K, and millions with M, and leaving just couple digits after comma?  I'd like to show 7436313 as 7.44M, and 2345 as 2,34K.  Is there some % string formatting operator available for that? Or that could be done only by actually dividing by 1000 in a loop and constructing result string step by step? Using Model to equally distribute points, spatially within known geometry using ArcGIS ModelBuilder? Is it possible to create a model in ArcGIS ModelBuilder where you simply state number of points and an area in the form of a polygon to get the model to try and equally space out the points based on the geometry of the polygon and number of points? Is the orbit in Schwarzshild metric a path with maximal proper time? In curved spacetime particles follow timelike geodesics, which should have maximal proper time (at least locally). I thought this path usually corresponds to a global maximum, and there are only strange exceptions. Propably I was wrong, or I really don't understand something, because it doesn't seem to be true for the case of orbitals in Schwarzschild geometry.  The Schwarzschild metric is (with +--- signature)  $$ g_{\mu\nu} = \textrm{diag}\left(1-\frac{2GM}{r},-\left(1-\frac{2GM}{r}\right)^{-1},-r^2,-r^2\sin^2\theta\right) $$  An observer with fixed $r,\theta,\phi$ coordinates will age according to $d\tau_1 = \sqrt{g_{tt}}dt$. An observer, which orbits the center at the same constant radius with $\theta=\pi/2$ will age according to $d\tau_2 = \sqrt{g_{tt}-\omega^2r^2\sin^2\theta}dt$, so he ages slower during the same amount of coordinate time $dt$. If the two observers start from the same point, they will meet again after a full rotation of the orbiting observer, and the orbiting observer will age less. What I don't understand is that the orbit is the geodesic (if the angular velocity is set properly), so why didn't he age more? He should have been on the path with maximal proper time. Do null and alternative hypotheses have to be exhaustive or not? I saw a lot of times claims that they have to be exhaustive (the examples in such books were always set in such way, that they were indeed), on the other hand I also saw a lot of times books stating they should be exclusive (for example $\mathrm{H}_{0}$ as $\mu_1=\mu_2$ and $\mathrm{H}_{1}$ as $\mu_1&gt;\mu_2$) without clarifying the exhaustive issue. Only before typing in this question I found somewhat stronger statement on the  -- "The alternative need not be the logical negation of the null hypothesis".  Could someone more experienced explain which is true, and I would be grateful for shedding some light on the (historical?) reasons for such difference (the books were written by statisticians after all, i.e. scientists, not philosophers). MySQL Case problem I am trying to run a SQL code (I use MySQL). What I want to do is to set DATE_REACT a value when the first condition is satisfied, and a different value when the first condition is not satisfied. The problem is that the first condition is executed always, even when it shouldn't. What I am doing wrong?  UPDATE BILLS SET STATE = 2, DATE_REACT = CASE  WHEN (DATE_EM &lt;= CURTIME() &lt;= ADDTIME(DATE_EM, '00:02:00')) THEN ADDTIME(CURTIME(), '00:13:00') ELSE ADDTIME(DATE_REACT, '00:13:00') END WHERE STATE = 1; What counts as an attack? I was looking over the class feature of the 'fiend' patron warlock in 5e. I'm a bit confused on what actions the player needs to take before they can use the 'Hurl Through Hell' ability on an enemy. The PHB states:     Starting at 14th level, when you hit a creature with an attack, you can use this feature to instantly transport the target through the lower planes.   I'm not clear on what an 'attack' means in this context. Does it have to be a physical attack like a sword or crossbow? Do magical attacks like Eldritch Blast that require an attack roll count? What about spells with no attack roll? I just upgraded from Ubuntu 10.04 to Mint 16. The installer did not detect my existing RAID 1 array, and I can't access it anymore.  My drives are:  SDA - First RAID Disk SDB - Second RAID Disk SDC - Non-RAID where the OS is installed.   The disks are full of stuff I want to keep, so I don't want to create a new RAID.   On the old machine, the two raid drives became MD0, which was a physical disk for Logical Volume Management.  How do I put the two halves together and get it to mount at boot? (I know how to mount single drives and how to add fstab entries for single drives, but the part I don't know is how to mount the two drives as one disk as a RAID. How many String objects will be created when using a plus sign? Show that $\lim_{z \rightarrow \infty} -z^xe^{-z} = 0$ Let $x&gt;0$ be a constant. Show that $\lim_{z \rightarrow \infty} -z^xe^{-z} = 0$.  Do I apply L'hopital's rule here? It doesn't seem to help, for example, after one round of differentiating the numerator and denominator, I get $\frac{d}{dz} z^x = xz^{x-1}$ and $\frac{d}{dz}e^z = e^z$. I am unsure on how to proceed. Are there any tools, methods, incantations to recover recently deleted files on Ubuntu?  If it makes any difference, I want to recover a  2.x database file. But would be better to have a method/tool that works on any kind of file. How to draw simple table How can I adjust the mouse scroll speed? So I'm trying to prove the following two inequalities: $$\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2} \leq \phi(n) \leq n.$$ The upper bound we get from simply noting that $\phi(n) = n \prod_{p | n}\left( 1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)$ and the fact that $(1 - \frac{1}{p}) \leq 1$. But how can we get the lower bound? I tried using the same expression for $\phi(n)$ but it seems to not really give me the inequality. Can you help? How do I disable tabs for  tag I am using &lt;a&gt; tags for links on a web page. How do I disable the Tab key from selecting either of them? How do I run a GUI app via SSH? Quantum teleportation and no-communication theorem According to the Wikipedia article for the :     In very rough terms, the theorem describes a situation that is analogous to two people, each with a radio receiver, listening to a common radio station: it is impossible for one of the listeners to use their radio receiver to send messages to the other listener. This analogy is imprecise, because quantum entanglement suggests that perhaps a message could have been conveyed; the theorem replies 'no, this is not possible'.   According to the Jet Propulsion's recent article on quantum teleportation:   they can effect an entangled photon (B) with another photon (A) to change the state of the other entangled photon.  Doesn't this contradict what the no-communication theorem states ? In  it says that flagged comments can be handled automatically if flagged repeatedly (3 + (score / 3) flags = deletion). Which is great; mods are busy people.  In , the venerable Bill the Lizard says that if all comments on a post are obsolete, you can flag the post (or one of the comments) with a custom flag saying that they're all obsolete, and the mod can remove them with one fell swoop. Problem is, that requires a mod.  What should I do when some of the obsolete comments are mine? I can't flag my own comments, and I don't like raising custom flags if I can avoid it.  You're wondering why I don't just delete them. There are two scenarios where I don't, at least not immediately:   Someone has commented with incorrect information. In that situation, I reply to the comment telling them how they've got it wrong. (Sometimes, of course, they quite correctly reply telling me how I got it wrong, which is neither here nor there&nbsp;&mdash; we still end up with obsolete comments. :-) ) Frequently, they reply saying "you're right" but (near universally) leave the comment lying around. I can (and do) then comment again saying "Let's clean these up" and flag their comments as obsolete. But I can't flag mine. Nor do I want to remove mine while the incorrect comment is still there; it leaves a confusing situation for anyone coming to the post later. Someone has commented with correct information. In that situation, if appropriate (e.g., the post author isn't busily editing at the same time and I know enough to do it properly), I'll edit the comment into the post and reply with "You're right, edited that in." and flag their comment as obsolete. These are rarely removed by the commenter. And again I can't flag mine.   The first scenario is the more problematic, since I can go back 10-20 minutes later and remove my "edited that in" comment and there's no harm if their comment is still there.  I currently bookmark and check back periodically, but that's labor-intensive and I'd like a better way.  Ideally, I'd want to tie my comment to one I've flagged so that it's deleted automatically if the other one is (by flagging, or by the commenter). That's a fair bit of development, though, I'm guessing.  What should I do? Go with a custom flag saying "The conversation between X and me is now obsolete," even though that means dumping it on a mod? This is a follow-up to an earlier question regarding .  Having achieved the left-alignment goal, I would now like the caption of the subfigure to be bottom-aligned, while having the subfigure itself be top-aligned. As an example, in the figure below, subfigures (a) and (b) would share an uppermost edge, and their captions would share a lowermost edge, and similarly for subfigures (c) and (d). This is most appropriate for the overall layout style of my document and also the content of the subfigures themselves.    \documentclass{article} \usepackage[font=footnotesize]{subcaption} \usepackage[draft]{graphicx}  \begin{document} \begin{figure}[!ht] \captionsetup[subfigure]{justification=justified,singlelinecheck=false} \centering \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{fig/workflow-S} \caption{workflow $S$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{fig/workflow-S-run} \caption{run of $S$} \end{subfigure} \vskip 8pt \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{fig/workflow-S'} \caption{workflow $S'$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{fig/workflow-S'-run} \caption{run of $S'$} \end{subfigure} \caption{Here's a figure} \end{figure} \end{document}   I've experimented with the minipage settings for subfigure, specifically using [t] instead of [b], but it seems to have no effect. I'm unsure as to whether a position of [t] would produce the right effect anyway, or whether it would shift the captions up as well.  Why is [t] not working here, and what's the right way to produce the layout I need?   The solution should generalise to an arbitrary number of subfigures per row, subfigures which are text or tables rather than images, and should not require any hard-coded sizes. Arrangements of MISSISSIPPI with all S's and P's separated If the all S,P are separated in the word MISSISSIPPI then the total possible arrangements are $k\frac {10!}{4!.4!} $ then value of k is? Now all S,P are separated so we can have slash method. Thus they can be placed alternatively in $6! $ ways and rest 5 can be placed in $5! $ ways. Thus we equate to get $$6!.5!=k\frac {10!}{4!.4!} $$  to get $k=13.7$ while $k=4/3$ .Where is my mistake Thanks In doing instanton problems or when connecting quantum field theory to statistical mechanics, I often see people trying the Wick rotation trick by defining an imaginary time $\tau\equiv it$. So, in this case, we should make sure that $\tau$ is imaginary, right? However, I often see places where people seem to handle $\tau$ as a real number, for example setting $\tau$ to $\pm\infty$. Moreover, I remember in one of my quantum mechanics classes, the professor said the Euclidean time $\tau$ was real. I am so confused and need some good explanations.