Cant install python 3.6.3 on ubuntu 16.04
dpkg error: "trying to overwrite file, which is also in..."
Straighten Vertices Along a Line On a line, I need to line up the bottom vertex points in relation to a top reference vertex point. How could I reset the X Y and Z coordinates of these vertex points to essentially line them up all through use of the vector of the reference point vertex.  I do not have access to Mesh -> Transform -> Scale on Axis for aligning vertices along a line. One of the double sockets in our garage needed replacing (damaged after a washing pole hit it) - a pretty trivial job that I'd done before. So I flipped the MCB for the ring main, used a non-contact voltage tester to check nothing was there, and set to work. I disconnected the old socket fine, and was lining the cables up to fit into the new socket when... ow.  My finger bridged the live and earth pins, and suffice to say the live wire was very much alive. Bar a few finger spasms I was fine fortunately, and believe me I realise I was very lucky in that respect (I'm in the UK, so that was 240V.) Before finishing the job I then shut off the entire property's electrics - I was taking no more chances.  Further inspection confirmed two things I immediately suspected at this point - the MCB in the garage (installed before we moved into the house) was shutting off power via the neutral, not the live, and the voltage tester was dodgy (I had tested it on the same socket earlier and it seemed fine, further testing showed it presumably had a loose connection internally and only worked sporadically.) Needless to say it's now in the bin, and an electrician has been called to sort the MCB and check the rest of the house for similar issues.  Unsurprisingly this has shaken me up a bit - I would say I'm a rather safety conscious person, and in this case thought I'd done all the checks properly (including taping over the relevant trip switch to ensure no-one flipped it back on while I was working.) In some ways I can't help feeling I was unlucky that the MCB was wired by a cowboy, in combination with the voltage tester failing in the way that it did, at the time that it did. However, I'm not one to solely blame tools - clearly some, if not most of the blame here lies with myself also.  So in short, what should I have done differently - and was I primarily being stupid, or really quite unlucky? Spacings between continuous uniform random variables As a Graduate Mathematics student, my interest lies in Number theory. I am curious to know if Number theory has any connections or applications to physics. I have never even heard of any applications of Number theory to physics. I have heard Applications of linear algebra and analysis to many branches of physics, but not number theory.  Waiting forward in receiving interesting answers! After learning about the  datasets I've working with the following layers, from the USA data   Country boundaries State boundaries County boundaries City boundaries ZipCode/Postcode boundaries   What I am trying to find is the equivalent (where appropriate) of the same data for various countries.  Is there any free administrative boundaries available as shapefiles for other countries? How do I install the Firefox Developer Edition? show that a distance function is continuous Let $X$ be a metric space with metric $d$. Define $d: X \times X \to \mathbb{R}$, show that $d$ is continuous.  I would like to show that the function is continuous the topology way (since it is a course on topology).   Let $(a,b)$ be a basic open set in $\mathbb{R}$, then $d^{-1}(a,b) = \{(x,y): a&lt;d(x,y)&lt;b\}$. Define $A= \bigcup_{x \in X} B_{b} (x)$, where $B_b (x) = \{y \in X| d(x,y)&lt;b$}. Clearly $A$ is open. Now define $C = \{(x,y):d(x,y)&gt;a \}.$ Essentially I hope that $A \cap C$ is open. But I am stuck in showing that $C$ is open.  Any help please? :) Optimize table layout I am pretty sure $(B_{t}^{2})$ not Markov because the squared random walk is not.    I guess I can repeat the method since to be Markov it must satisfy the discrete.  Thanks Repeatedly taking differences on a polynomial yields the factorial of its degree? Pass An Instantiated System.Type as a Type Parameter for a Generic Class The title is kind of obscure. What I want to know is if this is possible:  string typeName = &lt;read type name from somwhere&gt;; Type myType = Type.GetType(typeName);  MyGenericClass&lt;myType&gt; myGenericClass = new MyGenericClass&lt;myType&gt;();   Obviously, MyGenericClass is described as:  public class MyGenericClass&lt;T&gt;   Right now, the compiler complains that 'The type or namespace 'myType' could not be found." There has got to be a way to do this. Evaluate $ \int_{0}^{\frac{\pi}2}\frac1{(1+x^2)(1+\tan x)}\:\mathrm dx$ Should your PhD students call you by your first name? Is the convex hull of closed set in $\mathbb R^{n}$ is closed? Is convex hull of closed set in $\mathbb R^{n}$ closed? What's the best solution to check a users country? Calculating a spherical polygon centroid Exporting feature class into multiple feature classes based on field values using ArcGIS Desktop? My prof gave us this definition of an Echelon system:     A system of m linear equations in n variables is called an echelon system if         m ≤ n.   Every variable is the leading variable of at most one equation.   Every leading variable is to the left of the leading variables of all lower equations.   Every equation has a leading variable.      I don't understand this definition at all.  Q1)If you have this system of equations:  $ax_1 + bx_2 + cx_3 = z$  $dx_1 + ex_2 + fx_3 = z$  its not an echelon system because of multiple equations having the same variable as the leading variable and therefore violating rule #2.  But if you switch around variables and rewrite the equation as:  $ax_1 + bx_2 + cx_3 = z$  $ex_2 + dx_1 + fx_3 = z$  It becomes an echelon system! Why would the way you write a system of equations affect its definition?  Q2)Why would point number three matter? Can't you just move around the equations so that they are in order of variables?  Q3)Why would point number four matter? If you have a equation in the system that doesn't have a leading variable can't you just disregard it? For example if you have the equation $0x = 0$ in the equation can't you just ignore it to have a echelon system since it doesn't affect the solution of the system? Do immature fruits perform photosynthesis? Most immature fruits are green: peppers, pine cones, plums, lots of them. I want to know if the green is from chlorophyll in the cells. Do the fruit cells perform photosynthesis? When you cover a green stem or leaf, it will turn pale and stretch. That is because the stems have little need for chlorophyll in the dark, which is why they are pale. They stretch because the auxins in the stems are not destroyed by the photons, and the stems stretch out and topple over. If a green fruit is covered, will it turn pale and stretch like that? If $\Gamma$ is satisfiable then $\Gamma$ is consistent We say that $\Gamma$ is consistent if for no $\phi$, then both $\Gamma\vdash \neg\phi$ and $\Gamma\vdash\phi$. We say that $\Gamma$ is satisfiable if there is a structure $M$ s.t. $\models_M\gamma[s]$ for alle $\gamma\in\Gamma$.  I want to show that if $\Gamma$ is satisfiable, then $\Gamma$ is consistent.  I'm thinking we assume that $\Gamma$ is not consistent, and then show that $\Gamma$ is not satisfiable. So if $\Gamma$ is not consistent then both $\Gamma\vdash \neg\phi$ and $\Gamma\vdash\phi$ for some $\phi$. But by soundness theorem then $\Gamma\models\neg\phi$ and $\Gamma\models\phi$, meaning for structure $M$, we have $\models_M\neg\phi[s]$ (whereas $\not\models_M\phi[s]$) and $\models_M\phi[s]$. So would this mean that $\Gamma$ is not satisfiable? I'm a little confused, because wouldn't this instead be a contradiction?