darklight03/StackMIAsub huggingface dataset:
I am wondering if the verb expect is used as a stative verb in the following sentence: I entered the classroom and [to expect] to see some students but instead I found a note which said [...] Would it be possible to say "I was expecting"? Or is the verb stative in this context? Because then we can't use it in a continuous form, according to my grammar book.
Can anyone please explain why light reflects at the boundary between two regions with different impedances? This sounds very simple but I got confused when I tried to think of how light and atoms interact with one another at the boundary. This question can actually be generalised to the reflection of all types of waves. I have to admit I have no understanding of the microscopic detail of reflection.
I believe I am stuck with only these two options, but would appreciate an alternative usage. I am somewhat limited on sentence structure as this application is part of a mail merge document. The purpose of the business is to own and operate The Tutoring Center franchise location. OR The purpose of the business is to own and operate a The Tutoring Center franchise location. Since the business will be a franchise (one of many), I feel the article "a" is necessary. Help is much appreciated!
What are the desirable pre-requisites to be able to learn model theory well? In particular, it seems that connections to algebra are used heavily especially as examples. I would like to know if a good grasp of algebra is essential for a deeper understanding of model theory and whether a good grasp of analysis and topology would compensate for lack of the former. Thank you.
I have started learning some basics of Category Theory.Currently i am trying to understand the concept of Direct limit and Inverse Limit but i find this concept really hard to digest. Could some one explain me with some details the good idea to think about Direct Limit and Inverse limit in practice? I have knowledge of subjects like Module Theory,Galois Theory,Commutative Algebra(at the level of Atiyah Macdonald),Basics of Lie Algebra and of course elementary topics like Group theory and field theory etc.
I'm interested in using TikZ to draw rooted trees whose leaves should all be on the same level, pretty much like this: Please don't pay attention to the fancy style and colours, I'm only interested in having all leaves at the same level. Anyone knows how to do this? I've looked into the manual and the appropriate section on Texample, but had no luck so far. UPDATE: a while after this question was answered, I found out about the LaTeX newicktree package, which allows you to draw such trees in an extremely simple way, just by specifying them in the format people in phylogenetics already use. This is obviously much simpler than resorting to TikZ, but thanks anyway to everyone who contributed to helping me.
My understanding is that dark matter cannot be (or is at least highly unlikely to be) an exotic form of any known particle. On the other hand, articles about particle accelerators seem to say that the Higgs is the last piece missing in the Standard Model jigsaw puzzle. If dark matter is determined to be some form of new particle, what are the certain implications? Might such a discovery "stand to the side" of the Standard Model or would it certainly change the foundations? (Forgive my extremely lay understanding and vocabulary -- please feel free to correct my mistakes.)
If I pick up a rock and set it on a ledge above my head, I do work in the process. The work I do is termed "potential energy". We know how to recover the energy (i.e. let it fall back to earth). However, while resting above the surface the energy is said to be "stored in the gravitational field", presumably meaning the space between the elevated rock and earth. Suppose we perform this experiment on the moon where we know the space between the elevated rock and surface consists of an empty vacuum of space which contains absolutely nothing. How can empty space store energy? That is, how can "nothing" have any properties whatsoever?
I was writing an email and faced the following situation: I am coming to Oxford this summer. If you are still around, I would be glad to hang out with you. Now normally we don't construct the conditional statement like the one above, where a present verb is followed by would. But if I change the second one to will it kind of becomes very direct and that's not what I want. So is the construction above still correct or should I go with something else? If it's correct, could someone explian the technical details behind it?
Im studying old exams and came across this one Question: a. Find a (discrete time or continuous time) random process that is wide-sense stationary (WSS) but not strict-sense stationary. b. Also, is it possible for a strict-sense stationary random process not to be wide-sense stationary? Answer: a. A sequence of uncorrelated random variables with common expected values and common variances constitute a WSS discrete time process, but is not strict-sense stationary if the random variables are not identically distributed. b. A seqeunce of independent identically distributed random variables with infinite variances constitute a strict-sense stationary discrete time process that is not WSS. a. Can anyone give a simple example of such a process? b. Our course litterature says WSS processes are always strict-sense stationary?!?
I remember being presented a mathematical puzzle some years back that I still can't solve. The problem is defined as follows: We have two points on a plane, and using only a compass, how do we find other two points, so that all four of them would be vertices of a square? I'm not sure whether the first two points were supposed to be vertices of the same edge of a square or not, so solutions to both variants are welcome.
I know the word uxorious that is used to describe a husband who dotes on his wife excessively. What is the corresponding word for a wife who loves her husband dearly? I cannot pull anything out of my memory... and I feel it is very harsh on men if such a word weren't there! Example: He was an uxorious man who assiduously took care of all of his wife's needs. She was a __ woman who assiduously took care of all of her husband's needs.
I don't know if the title of this question is accurate or not. My vacabulary of grammar is very limited. May you could understand me by the following example: She told me that the earth is moving around the sun. She told me that the earth was moving around the sun. Which one is correct? Should the tense in that clause always agree with the tense in main clause?
A lot of text books mention that one of the reasons that classical mechanics failed to explain atomic and subatomic processes is that electrons which accelerate should release energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation, which would lower the atoms overall energy level, but this does not happen. One place where I discovered this, for example, is in the description for the Bohr model. What I don't understand is why everyone takes for granted the fact that the electron is accelerating. I thought the electron orbits the nucleus at a, more or less, constant velocity. Are people referring to specific situations when the atom is excited? Furthermore, I was under the impression that electrons already travel at the fastest allowable speed, the speed of light.
Okay, I am in no way a mathematics student but I happened to be writing a program on a map with coordinates of locations displayed on the map. My problem is that the points could be scattered on the map with an indefinite boundary and I need to find a boundary (rectangle) around these points and thus I need to get a formula to form an algorithm so that the program will find the optimum boundary itself. I hope this is understandable and thanks in anticipation of any response.
I'm a high school student. The head is hydrophilic, the tail is fatty acid, in other words hydrophobic. Here is the thing I don't understand, all textbooks state that water is repelled by hydrophobic tail, why? The hydrophilic head is composed of polar molecules, and water is polar, so they will attract each other. But why hydrophobic tail will repel polar molecule? Isn't hydrophobic tail is just composed of non-polar molecules?
Consider this situation: You sent an application for a job, then the company boss sends you an email, and tells you if you are in town, he likes to meet you in person. Is it correct to say? "It could have been a great pleasure to meet you, but unfortunately I am currently in Russia." I'm not sure what tense I should use, and I'm pretty sure the above sentence is incorrect. At the same time, I want it as much as possible in a formal and polite way.
I am trying to use IEEETrans to write a scientific paper in two column format. The issue is that one is not allowed to place figures in the left-hand side column of the first page. Figures should start on the top of the right-hand side column of the first page or alternatively, on the second page (any column). Is there any way to restrict the placement of floats to avoid using the left-hand side column of the first page?
In sports, we have the term "Commentator's curse", (humorous) The supposed propensity of a player to blunder after having his/her talents pointed out by the commentator. [Wiktionary] Is there a phrase that emphasizes that the sportsperson performed brilliantly soon after the commentator's talk highly about their achievements? For instance, a Cricket player hitting a six immediately after the commentator says that he has the highest number of sixes for his team. Or a Football (Soccer) player scoring from way outside the D-box just when the commentator says that the player had scored from a similar distance in the previous game. It might be termed as "pure co-incidence" but I'm just looking for something humorous/ emphatic as "commentator's curse" itself.
I know that massive gravitational bodies will curve the path that light travels. I think that quantum optical mediums also bend light. I am still confused of whether quantum optical mediums actually slow down light or if they just use absorption, re-emission, scattering, and delaying to create the illusion that light slows down in a medium. I do not see a fundamental difference between the two theories, because both describe "optical" phenomena of light. I am not sure if gravitational optics is a real field of study or a made up name. My question is there a mathematical equivalence between gravitational optics and quantum optics or are they mathematically incompatible theories?
Most of the references I found online simply note that "see you later" is a farewell or parting phrase but nothing discussed when it is appropriate to use the phrase. Is it acceptable to use "see you later" in each of the following circumstances? When you will be seeing the person again later that day When you will be seeing the person soon (e.g., in a few days) When you will be seeing the person again at some point in the future (e.g., next year at Christmas) When you are suggesting that you want schedule something specific Whenever you say goodbye, regardless of whether or not you will ever see them again
I am reading up on splines and as a beginner I have a basic question - Does it make sense to say - "I will fit a cubic b-spline to the data". As b-spline is just a representation of spline in terms of its bases. I think, a more accurate statement will be - "I will fit a natural/not-a-knot/clamped/etc. cubic spline to the data and present results in terms of its basis." My question arises out of my limited understanding of relevant concepts. Could someone please confirm this. Many thanks!
At the moment I'm a bit baffled. What sentence part is "visitors" in "I'm not allowed visitors"? I would not call it an object or a subject complement as "to be allowed" is no linking verb. The only idea I have is to say the sentence is elliptic and the full form would be "I'm not allowed to have visitors". Here "visitors" is object of the to-infinitive. So is it possible to say "visitors" is object of a to-infinitive (to have) that was deleted?
As far as I understand, the incident photon interacts by photoelectric, Compton scattering or pair production with the electrons of the crystal (NaI(Tl) in our case). The electron that emerges from these interactions generates a number of photons in the UV or visible which are proportional to the gamma ray energy. Then, the light produced can be read out with photodiodes, photomultpliers, avalanche photodiodes, silicon photomultipliers, and other photo sensors, right?. So, how are those electrons converted into UV or visible photons?
I've read here that microwaves are blocked by the holes in a microwave window because the holes on the door are small enough to prevent the microwaves from passing through. However, if wavelength is only the distance between successive crests of a wave, why should that decide what a certain wave can fit through? Why is amplitude not the deciding factor and is there a way to explain this visually?
Projectiles containing delicate elecrtronic equipment may be damaged if they are subjected to high accelerations. For this reason, such projectiles may be fired from guns with long barrels but not from guns with short barrels. -Explain why a projectile fired from a long-barreled gun is subject to less acceleration than a projectile fired from a short-barrelled gun if the range is the same in both cases. This question has been a nightmare for me when i was in highschool and until now i cant have a good answer your help would be appreciated.
I am new to LyX so I'm sorry if this question is really naive. I'm using LyX on a MacBook and I'm hoping to use the AEA document class on it. Since it is not available automatically, seems that I need to somehow install it on my own. All the help pages I can find talks about layouts and stuff that I, as total layman, have no idea what they are. Can somebody please show me how I can do it with simple language?
I'm reading about how a "straight line" depends on the geometry of space. While I think I understand this, the example people give is: "Imagine a straight line on earth connecting two cities. It's actually curved because the earth is curved". My response to that would be "Well no, because a truly straight line would cut through the earth. Like a straight string would cut through an apple". So question: If two people took an infinitely strong and light string, stood on opposite ends of the earth, and pulled almost infinitely tightly, would the string curve around the earth a few feet above, or would it cut through to the core?
I am currently reading the following paper by F.Takens: Multifractal analysis of dimensions and entropies. This paper discusses two different measures. One is generalized entropies and the other is generalized dimensions, however as far as I can see it doesn't discuss any association between the two. Can somebody please in a qualitative or [even better] quantitative give me an explanation about the relation between the two?
Our course slides offer the following definition: "A parametric probabilistic model is a set of probability distributions indexed by a finite-dimensional parameter vector." This description defines "parametric probabilistic model" in terms of "parameter", which isn't particularly helpful. But it brings to mind some vector of indices which tells you where to find a row (or rows) in a table. It is not clear to me whether "parameter" in this sense is related to my CS understanding of a parameter (i.e., a "knob") or even if a model's parameters have something to do with its random variables (e.g., are the parameters fixed values of a random variable?). Furthermore, what does it mean to "parameterize" a model?
I have this question on a homework assignment. I sat down with two other people for a long time and we derived the alternating harmonic series example, but I don't think that's valid because the question explicitly asks about sequences and not series. Note that it's for an analysis class and so far we've covered open and closed sets and balls, preimages, and cluster points.
I've read through answers to similar questions, and I haven't been able to find a satisfying answer. I've heard it said that in order to make out something, you need to use light with a wavelength at least as large as the object. In what way can you mathematically derive this heuristic? Moreover, does this apply generally? The other day I was thinking in the context of sound waves and how fruit bats use them to resolve insects- is this a reason why they use high frequencies?
Question: What are some interesting or useful applications of the Hahn-Banach theorem(s)? Motivation: Most of the time, I dislike most of Analysis. During a final examination, a question sparked my interest in the Hahn-Banach theorem(s). One of my favorite things to do is to write a math blog (mlog?) post about various topics so that I can better understand them, but I know very little about Hahn-Banach and a quick google search didn't seem to point to anything neat. I was interested in seeing what you all liked (if anything!) about the Hahn-Banach Theorems. Also, I can't seem to make this a community wiki, but I think it ought to be one. If someone could either fix this, I would appreciate it! (If not, please delete this!)
is it possible to use participial prepositions in the following sense, or am I creating a dangling modifier. Moreover, is the punctuation correct? Considering his broken leg, Peter was not able to walk anymore. Peter was not able to walk anymore considering his broken leg. Understanding Einstein's statements is neccessary, since Peter wants to graduate in Physics in order to get a good job. Since Peter wants to graduate in Physics understanding Einstein's statements is neccessary, in order to get a good job. Can participial preposition be used as subordinating conjunctions? Maybe a native could help me out here. Thanks!
Special relativity theory says simultaneity is relative, meaning that different observers will not agree on what happened first and what second. Does it then make sense to say that looking at distant stars, we see them how they looked "billions of years ago" and not how they look now? Does it make sense to talk about what these stars look like now? How do we define this "now" if simultaneity is relative?
So there is this kind of building located in the centre of a fork in the road (maybe in streets too). I don't know how to put it into words, but it looks like this: Or this: Is there a single English word for that kind of building? If it is a house, is there another name for that? In my native language (Indonesian), it's called Rumah Tusuk Sate. Which if translated bluntly into English, it's Skewer House, which sounds a bit weird to me.
Possible Duplicate: Why the use of 'would' in the following When we tell a joke or narrate a story in simple present can we use 'would' in some cases? For example: He goes up to this man and punches him in the face. The man looks straight into his eyes and tells him that he will take revenge He goes up to this man and punches him in the face. The man looks straight into his eyes and tells him that he would take revenge
According to this extract from Wikipedia, the pronunciation of the term piste meaning "a ski run of compacted snow.": varies slightly in English, with British English using a long "e", (e.g. rhymes with "beast"), and American pronunciation using a short "i" (e.g. rhymes with "list"). Actually, references such as the Cambridge Dictionary or the ODO suggest that the pronunciation is the same in both dialects, that is, with a long "e". Does the AmE pronunciation of "piste" really differ from the BrE one, or are both versions correct?
I am finding hard to understand application of inclusion and exclusion in Matching problem? Suppose that n- n male-female couples are at a party and that the males and females are randomly paired for a dance ? what is the probability that none of the couple are paired together? I don't understand why we have to take Union then use inc-ex principle to solve it? Can some one help me to understand ? Thank you
I'm struggling to find a way to express the idea that it's possible that something was done before something else was done. I'm not sure if I'm just tired, but the idea is this: In the present perfect, you would say "it has been done before". When you add "may" it becomes "it may have been done already". In the perfect past, you would say "it had been done before". How does that sentence look like when you add "may" to it? "It might have been done before"? "It may have been done before"? Or even "it may have had been done before", as clumsy as it sounds? None of these sound particularly correct, so I'm at a loss as to what the solution here is.
If we consider two spins, we can think of the spins as being either parallel (up|up or down|down)or anti-parallel (up|down or down|up). Or we can think of them as being in the triplet or singlet configuration. Is one description more correct than the other? Or is it just a matter of choice between two basis sets? It would seem to me that using T/S is correct because it accurately reflects the symmetry needed in the wavefunction.
Find the distribution of U=min(X,Y) where X and Y are independent random variables and both exponentially distributed with parameters lambda and mu respectively. The only headway I have made is that P(U< u)= P(X< u)P(Y< u) by considering the joint distribution of X and Y and the fact X and Y are independent; is this right? If it is then U isn't a 'named' distribution function so is just stating the cdf enough to answer the question?
I've noticed "At this stage" preceding delivery of the negative to the reader. What's the reason for this? "At this stage, unfortunately (for you), we won't be proceeding further with your application." "At this stage, your application has been declined." "At this stage, travel arrangements will be at your expense." This is used when there are no other stages. Why do people use this adverbial phrase? do you think it helps the reader to deal with emotional pain?
In Thomas Harvey's Elementary Grammar and Compsition he says: A complex sentence whose subject or predicate only is a clause, need not be separated into principal and subordinate clauses in analysis. Later in the section he gives the example, "That he is very sick, is evident," parses the sentence, then gives a sentence diagram. I'm curious how one would break this sentence into its principal and subordinate clause.
I am studying probabilites and the notion of poisson random variable was introduced in the class. But it seems to me that the introduction of poisson random variable is to provide a easy approximation of the binomial random variable conditioned that n is large and p is small. Besides, the preconditions in the poisson distribution that events are independent of each other seem to come from the fact that binomial random variable is composed by many independent bernouli variables. So I wonder if originally, poisson distribution was invented to model binomial distribution or was it invented to solve a particular kind of problem
For some pdf ebooks, Adobe Reader displays the cover page alone even though the display mode is "two page view". Other than the cover page, the rest of the pdf content is displayed as two pages at once, which is expected in the "two page view" mode. My question is: Is it possible to enforce this behavior if I use pdflatex, and if so, how could I achieve that? The document class I'm using is memoir.
In algebraic geometry, we often consider a complex algebraic curve, and in order to get some intuition, we often draw it on the plane as if it were a plane curve. In most cases it turns out that the plane drawing really helps us thinking of the curve for instance when counting the number of intersections. Then I wonder, to what extent the plane drawing is legitimate (or not misleading) to "represent" the complex algebraic curve?