darklight03/StackMIAsub huggingface dataset:
I have this problem where I have two lines given and I have to find a transversal. However, it also has to be perpendicular to a given plane (lines are not necessarily in the given plane). My guess was that I would have to find perpendicular lines to the plane and then see if they are also transversals of those lines. But I've been stuck. Is this the right approach? Or should I start working from the lines and then tend to the plane and transversal being perpendicular?
I'm referring to this one: Any man who is his own translator has a fool for an editor. The resemblance that this expression bears to the one about any individual who chooses to represent himself/herself in a legal case is undeniable. Yet, even when the meaning of the latter expression is pretty clear to me, I'm not sure I get the point which whoever made up the translator/editor variant of the proverb was trying to make... I would be really glad if, in addition of getting an answer for the question in the title, you could help me unravel the meaning of the expression under consideration. Let me thank you in advance for your learned replies.
I know this on our hands/in our hands discrepancy has been discussed here in a broad way, but since it's idiomatic, I think it would be helpful to consider a few specific examples, like the one here. Would you use "on our hands" or "in our hands" here, and why? It refers to something you invented and produced, and you're guessing it will do well on the market. So you're not having anything literally in your hands. You don't know if it's a top-seller yet, you just think it will become one. That's why "on our hands" seems right to me. Am I wrong?
Is there a word to describe the competitive advantage gained from sabotaging a competitor, or more generally the advantage gained from dishonesty? An example: Your office receives pamphlets advertising an office cleaning service. Your current office cleaning service steals and hides that pamphlet before an employee at the office can see it. What words can one use to concisely describe the advantage that your current cleaning service has gained?
I recently installed AucTex on a new computer, and am having an issue that I do not recall with regards to accessing environments. Using C-c C-e, auto-complete etc., I am only able to access a handful of environments. Auctex does not detect align, matrix, or any other math environments. It is possible to simply enter the environments by hand, or create custom environments, but this seems tedious for something that I wouldn't expect to be happening. Perhaps there is something I am missing.
It seems Optimal Estimation/Control Theory requires a lot more than undergraduate maths. Any good book that would help me get started? I have so far referred the following books but found them quite difficult. Is it just me? is it the subject? or are there better books? Extra points for someone who gives a detailed road map of how to go about learning Optimal Estimation/Control Theory H.W Sorenson - Parameter Estimation Dan Simon - Optimal Estimation Theory Arthur Gelb - Applied Optimal Estimation
I am working on the lyrics for one of my songs and english is not my first language. Here's the question - which of these sentences is correct? No thorns to prick your heart No thorns to prick your heart with (Meaning that the character of the song has no 'thorns' (figuratively) he/she could use to prick the heart of the one he/she addresses to) Thanks in advance
When someone says, I barely understand that. Does he mean: He almost doesn't understand [which means he understands a bit] He almost understands [which means he doesn't understand] Or if someone says: Your brain is barely used. Does he mean: Your brain is almost not used [which means, it is used, but very rarely] Your brain is almost used [which means it isn't] I used to think that it was the first option. But a friend, out of the blue, said it was the second one. Which one is it? Or have my friend and I got it entirely wrong? Are there other words with similar meanings to barely? Is nearly one of them?
So a stage whisper is defined as (American Heritage Dictionary): The conventional whisper of an actor, intended to be heard by the audience but supposedly inaudible to others on stage. A whisper that can be or is intended to be overheard. Is there any good description of the opposite? For example, if I'm in a crowded place, and I mock-yell under my breath so that only I or a single friend am actually aware of it, how could we describe that?
I noticed that her eyes had been dancing as she looked out at the scenery. It appeared in a state-sponsored high school leaving examination in Slovakia last week and it seems to have been adapted from a short story by a native speaker, so it really ought to be correct, but I don't see how or why. Past continuous seems the obvious choice, this just seems wrong as it's all happening at the same time.
I have read that electromagnetic waves carry momentum because they carry energy, while energy is equivalent to mass. So they carry momentum. But this explanation is in the context of special relativity. I don't know whether mass energy equivalence is necessary for wave momentum. So I hope you can discuss in the contexts of both Newtonian or special relativity. A quantitative definition like the Maxwell stress tensor of electromagnetic wave is better.
I find that when learning more abstract concepts, it helps to have a 'simple' example tied to every theorem in order to fully appreciate the theorem or property. However, the course notes I am currently using for my studies of Measure Theory (this is a first course for me) do not have many examples. It is highly rigorous and detailed, but lacks examples. Are you aware of any introductory books on Measure Theory that has a good number of examples tied to each theorem? In other words I guess, do you know of very 'gentle' books on this topic?
Claim A directed graph has an Eulerian cycle if and only if every vertex has equal in degree and out degree, and all of its vertices with nonzero degree belong to a single strongly connected component. I was looking for this proof in the Internet, but all i have found are the proofs for undirected graphs. I would be glad, if someone can give a link or name of the book, where i can find proof for this claim.
The last few years I've noticed a trend of people posting articles or news stories on facebook that had offended them, and commenting with a sense of outrage they seemed also to relish on some level. Today I heard the term outrage porn for the first time, and felt delight in hearing this phenomenon succinctly and accurately named. I got to wondering if there was a word that described the surprise and satisfaction of hearing a concept captured by name for the first time... I'm not looking for general words describing the satisfaction of insight or clarity -- but a word or phrase that applies specifically to hearing a concept named for the first time.
In high school we learned to say "than I" and "as I" because you could potentially add an "am" to the end of the sentence. Examples: "She is smarter than I." (Think: "...than I am.") "He is as tall as I." (Think "...as I am.") So analogously, shouldn't it be "like I" as well: "He is sincere, just like I." (Think: "... like I am.") But universally, it seems that we use "like me". Where does this reasoning break down? Is there history here?
When I use the word "sorry" for something I did wrong I'm sorry I bumped into you. I would be apologizing. However, when I used the word "sorry" to express pity for something that is not actually my fault, I'm sorry you couldn't figure that out. I'm sorry for your loss. is it still called an "apology" in English? In Chinese, we wouldn't use the same word in these different sentences. I would love to know what this type of sentence is called.
I've been asking myself this and other questions in the field of philosophy of mathematics. Could we, if we were isolated from any kind of sensory experience, be able to learn mathematics? Also, what does it take to learn math?, is there a 'module' or a 'structure' (like the one theorized by Noam Chomsky in his studies on linguistics) in our brain that lets us apprehend mathematics?, do we need a language (be it natural, be it symbolic) to learn mathematics? PD: I'm a beginner to SE, if this question if off topic please do tell and do recommend me where should I ask it.
I'm looking for command to use in one terminal so as to know the following facts. Is there one LaTeX distribution installed ? What is the path where to put local classes or packages ? In my Mac, I know that it is '/usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/tex/latex'. The command will be used by one Python script so as to automate the installation of my personnal little classes or packages. The solutions given in the following comments work well on Mac, and I think that this works also under Linux, but I don't know how to do under Windows...
I have some TikZ code in my LaTeX document. Whenever I edit other parts in the LaTeX document, I recompile it. But repeating recompiling unmodified TikZ code can be time-consuming. I was wondering if there is some way to avoid re-compilation of unmodified part of LaTeX document? If such methods exist, do they apply not just to unchanged TikZ code but also unchanged non-TikZ code? Thanks and regards!
I am in need of help figuring this out-- If the only straight lines in hyperbolic geometry are those that pass through the center, then isn't there a right angle? (horizontal and vertical) Which fulfills that requirement of the definition of a rectangle. That leaves the other two sides as hyperbolic lines with negative curve and extending infinitely, resulting in three acute angles, right? Aren't the two straight lines passing through the center parallel to their opposite hyperbolic line? Which also fulfills the definition of a rectangle. I'm sure I am overlooking something or have gotten myself very confused. Please help.
Slightly tongue-in-cheek this one but written in good faith... I am a competent user of LaTeX and use it with Eclipse as IDE, MacTexlive as install, and XeTeX as engine to author my PhD. However, there are times when I like to procrastinate and love LaTeX as an end in itself not just as a means to an end. What would you recommend as a good way of procrastinating whilst usefully extending my capabilities and abilities to use LaTeX? In the past SVN, biber and beamer have served to distract me from my thesis. Any more potentially fruitful areas?
Can fusion and fission happen at the same time, in the same place? I was talking with a friend, and he thinks that fission and fusion happen at the same time at the sun, is that true? I guess this would cause perpetual motion, then I speculated that they could happen, but in different proportions and I believed that fusion is happening in a higher proportion than fission. What do you think? I've searched on wikipidia, and I still found no mention to fission happening in the sun.
This Batman equation thing got me thinking: for an arbitrary curve drawn on the Cartesian plane, can you write a corresponding equation which is not piecewise? What about closed shapes, a la the Batman symbol? I assume that there are limitations, such as that the curve would have to be differentiable and/or continuous everywhere, but is this possible for any random squiggle? Or is it not?
The English wikipedia page for Nothing starts with the sentence: Nothing is a pronoun denoting the absence of anything. I was expecting Nothing is a pronoun denoting the absence of everything. since in the context a positive answer is expected. Googles: N-gram viewer shows that anything is more common than everything in this context, so I assume that anything is the natural choice here. But why is that?
I am in a situation where i am expecting some data from my client. I want to write the same in a very polite manner that "i am expecting the data, even after my repeated intimations." Here i wanted to use a sentence as I'm just sending this mail to remind you that, currently i am awaiting for data. I am confused i should use wait or await in this context.
I would like to know if there is a common abbreviation for days of the week in a two letter form. I mean: Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday; can be abbreviated as Su, Mo, Tu, We, Th, Fr, Sa? Is this the common form? Note that I have also seen Sn for Sunday, and some times St for Saturday (but I think less frequently). It will be used in a tabular data program to show information about free work days of employed and each column can't have enought space to include full week day name. For "common form" I mean, what are the abbreviations that is more used in programs.
Are there any (mathematical) puzzles that are still unresolved? I only mean questions that are accessible to and understandable by the complete layman and which have not been solved, despite serious efforts, by mathematicians (or laymen for that matter)? My question does not ask for puzzles that have been shown to have either no solution or multiple solutions (or have been shown to be ambiguously formulated).
If a couple are having a romantic or sexy get away where they're staying in bed and having sex and otherwise hanging out - is there a term use for the periods where they're not actually in the act of having sex? Perhaps pillow talk is the closest term I can think of here - but this seems to refer to the act of just talking, whereas I'd like to encompass anything else they might do - like eating, watching TV etc. eg. During [something period] we had a tickle fight, I organised my to do list, and she knitted some socks. I'm looking for something you might use in a romance or sexy novel.
I'm not a native english speaker (so forgive me for my poor language skills in general :) ) and I'm puzzled by this "whose / which / of which" issue. I have a sentence like this: "BLAA is a project whose purpose is to build and...". To me it sounds that it should have which instead of whose. I was always tought that whose refers to a person and which to a matter, and based on that I would use which but all the articles I read about it seem to say that whose is the way to go. What to do? And please keep the explanations in KISS form ;) Thanks! -Heidi
I intend to study linear algebra during my summer vacation.I will be thankful if anyone could please point me to a good text.I do not care about the difficulty as long as the book is self contained.I do have some experience with problem solving and proof-writing. Edit:I don't care about applications.I prefer one which is quite theoretical. Secondly,here is a book I came across.I request comments on that book too.I will make a choice after some deliberations.
I was wondering if there was any way to flip a transistor or similar node component around in the circuitikz package? For the bipoles it's fairly simple as you just reverse the start and end, but for more advanced circuits I'm having trouble (things such as current mirrors or what have you). I've seen various solutions on scaling up and down, but none on flipping.
I was aked to solve the following problem: Guiven three lenghts and a triangle ABC, from every vertex whe draw one of the three lenghts, find the conditions such that the three lenghts meet in one point. Then I suposed that at least two lenghts and a side makes a triangle, supose that the side is AB and the two lenghts meets at P, then using the cosine theorem to the triangle ABC and tha traingle ABP and I get a very large expression involving only lenghts, but it was very complex, and I think it can be simplified. Then my question is, if there is a synthetic solution to the problem. Please I don't want a full solution. Thanks.
I've seen constraint and restriction used quite often in scientific literature. For example, This algorithm needs to be further improved due to severe space constraint and restriction. I simply can't figure out the subtle difference between constraint and restriction. They seem to be circularly defined according to each other. I assume that they must be different in some way. Otherwise, they wouldn't have been used together so often. If they were really close enough in meaning, why not just drop one and use the other? Or are they used in combination to place an emphasis?
I am looking for a high school/ pre-college level Algebra book that is self contained for self-study. Nothing special, I don't want a book about number theory, but a book in preparation of high school geometry, trigonometry and calculus. I have noticed that recommendations for Algebra books on this site, start with books that are really advanced (for my level) and overshoot the mark with suggestions for abstract Algebra or number theory. I am someone that is rebuilding my math skills and need to get a strong foundations before I move up in intellectual weight.
In my report, I am defining/describing some terms. What is a proper way to start and format a sentences like: The term crawling denotes the practice of ... Should I put the word/term crawling in quotes, bold, italic, or something else? I think The term "crawling" denotes the practice of ... looks a bit ugly but is probably easier to read. On Wikipedia, most terms seem to be formatted in bold font.
This might seems off topic or something, but I am a middle school student and i'm really into Quantum Field Theory and String theory and every video on youtube or article on the internet shows only the concept and Intro to these theories but I want to know about the maths envolved and do the maths myself as well , so i would love it if you guys would be suggest me a site or anything else where i can learn from scratch all the maths involved in Quantum Mechanics and maybe Einstein's Relativity as well.
So the category of affine schemes is dual to the category of commutative rings, Stone spaces are dual to Boolean algebras, localizable measurable spaces are dual to commutative Von Neumann algebras, and I'm sure there are many more examples. In general, a category of algebraic structures is going to be dual to some related category of geometric structures. My question is, then: is there an analogous story for coalgbraic things? If I take a category of coalgebras for some comonad and flip the arrows around, will I get something interesting? Are there any good examples of this over familiar comonads (say, the costate comonad)?
I've been trying to find one single word that covers knowledge concerning both the properties and cultivation of plants, but have come short with some words. Here are some of the words I thought of, but eventually found lacking: Botany: I feel this implies purely scientific research on plants, ignoring the cultivation of plants and things like crop rotations and irrigation techniques. Agriculture: I think this word only covers food crops and plants commonly grown for decoration. I feel it misses out on the more thorough knowledge of all (not just commonly cultivated) plants, including currently unknown ones. Ultimately, I'm looking for a word that encompasses the subjects of both Botany and Agriculture, but have come short for now.
I'm trying to come up with a better word to describe a "driver" or "conditional"; basically, the name of an object or event which is a trigger for something else. Would it be appropriate to say that a button which turns on a light is an affector? If I believe I understand its usage in this context, it would only be an affector while triggering the event (the button is pressed). I've been unable to find support to convince me that this is the appropriate use of the word.
I just need to know what exactly happens when charging/discharging a capacitor. Is there any heat transfer between the capacitor and the surroundings? Is there a heat transfer between other parts of the surroundings (wires, the battery)? Another thing I don't understand generally... How do we know if a process is reversible or irreversible? Should we take the third law of thermodynamics as a principle and calculate the change in the entropy of the Universe through the formula given for entropy? If so, how about a process like the free expansion of a gas in which there is no heat transfer but the entropy increases? What about an adiabatic process? Where is the start point for calculating the change in entropy of the Universe for charging/discharging a capacitor?
Me and my dad are having a dispute over if this is is a run on sentence or not: From making silly pictures on Photoshop to playing a game that brought me to another world, and even being dubbed as the IT guy in elementary school. He argues that it's a run on, and the ending can't stand on it's own. I think otherwise. May anyone help settle this debate?
I was wondering if there is a method for finding primitive idempotents of a finite dimensional algebra (over a field)? or in other words is there any way to build the complete set of primitive idempotents from one (idempotent)? Or if it is impassible to find a method, I believe a good reference or some tricks (general notes) on idempotents is also going to be very useful to me.
Sometimes, I forget to use the proper form when an adverb is required. Or sometimes it simply doesn't appear to me one is required, unless I actually consider the grammar of my sentence. I suppose that's mostly because in my native language (German), there is no morphological difference between an adverb and an adjective. This led me to wonder: Is this distinction in English merely an idiosyncrasy or can I really semantically convey something other than intended, if I omit the suffix by mistake?
I'm doing an analysis, of client contracts that contain the following factors: The per-unit license price (A) The initial order quantity (B) The recommended retail price (C) What I'd like is a single figure that represents "How good of a deal" the client got, with the quality of the deal being a low license price in comparison to both the initial order quantity and recommended retail price. Generally speaking, The per-unit price decreases as the initial order quantity increases. The per-unit price increases as the recommended retail price increases However, as the contracts were often negotiated, there is a lot of deviation between the individual contracts. How can I go about this? My math is embarrassingly super rusty.
This is perhaps a beginner/simple question, but how does includegraphics determine the "box" encapsulating a vector graphic embedded on, say, a letter-size paper? When I read my EPS files (generated with Matlab) using GhostView, they appear in some corner of a full-size, otherwise blank page. Do the various page properties (like orientation, type, etc.) matter? And why does there need to be some blank page underneath the saved graphic for that matter? I'm trying to understand how best to prepare figures for publication. Thanks in advance.
What is the principle behind centrifugation? I understand the idea that you spin something around the centripetal force will cause an apparent force on the spinning system. However I don't quite grasp how particles (in the non subatomic sense) with different density should be affected differently. Quite coarsely, I would expect to write down Newton's second law, but then the mass would simplify and the acceleration of every particle would be the same, regardless of mass. Is friction the answer? Or am I missing something silly?
For a long time I have been investigating this question on my own, but it seems impenetrable. The question is this: To find a method whereby it becomes possible to convert proof A into proof B, where the proofs A,B can be of anything, e.g. a lemma, theorem, etc. For example, it is possibly in geometry to solve something by means of coordinates or by means of euclidean geometry. However, these proofs are usually found one after the other, independently, and not derived one from the other. I am asking if it is possible to derive the euclidean geometry proof directly from the coordinate proof, or vice versa. I would really appreciate any insights regarding this from experts, or papers/articles that touch on this topic. Thanks.