darklight03/StackMIAsub huggingface dataset:
I have a few questions about simple situations. What should I say to another person right after falling? a) I fell b) I have fallen What should I say to another person right after throwing a ball? a) I threw the ball b) I have thrown the ball What should I say to another person right after taking something? a) I took b) I have taken Please provide explanations for your answers.
I live in Thailand and we pronounce "w" and "v" the same. When I spoke to American people they told me that the "v" sound was different from "w". They told me to move my lower lip to the upper teeth, then say "v", but I don't get it. I want to know how to pronounce "v" in English. If you can suggest me how to practice it, that would be great!
I was looking at the ice formed in my refrigerator and found out there were a lot of air bubbles inside it. The shape of the air pockets seemed strange to me. There were many small spherical ones and the bigger ones were in the shape of vertical ellipses. I am not able to understand what's the cause of these different shapes of bubbles. can anyone explain?
The following is from the MIT-Harvard Tournament: You are trapped in ancient Japan, and a giant enemy crab is approaching! You must defeat it by cutting off its two claws and six legs and attacking its weak point for massive damage. You cannot cut off any of its claws until you cut off at least three of its legs, and you cannot attack its weak point until you have cut off all of its claws and legs. In how many ways can you defeat the giant enemy crab? (Note that the legs are distinguishable, as are the claws.)
I am a physics undergrad interested in stuff like dynamical systems, chaos theory etc. Is there ongoing research in these fields? I am talking about pure research and not applications to things like weather etc? I hope this question is appropriate for Physics SE. I asked this question, because I browsed through the websites of the physics departments of a few renowned universities (MIT, Princeton, Caltech) etc, but nowhere it mentioned research in these areas.
I picked up a copy of G.H. Hardy's 'Divergent Series' a few days ago. So far I love it, as I love the ideas associated with sequences and series, but I am finding it a bit difficult to understand. I assumed I knew everything I would need to understand it(Calculus I/II, etc.), but perhaps not. What would the possible prerequisites for understanding this book be? Also, does anyone have any tactics for getting the best comprehension/understanding of the concepts in this book? Thanks!
I know that the proper way to use "not too long ago" is: "Not too long ago, contractors used to build houses and sell them to dealers. It was the responsibility of the dealers to provide financing to potential home buyers." Instead of these two sentences, can I use: "If not too long ago, contractors used to build houses and sell them to dealers, who were responsible for providing financing to potential home buyers, today most builders also offer financing alternatives."? My question is whether "if not too long ago" is correct or not. If it's not correct, I would highly appreciate it if someone could explain why. Thank you, Maria
I created a table and it starts from the left and goes all the way to right, which looks really skewed. So I want to center align the whole table but couldn't figure out how to do it. I'm new to latex so I don't know how to use other plugin or macros, but I suppose there's a command for this basic functionality. Can anyone tell me?
I am working with certain input-output maps that can be thought of as large RLC-networks. I thought maybe this might be a place to get some thoughts/ideas/answers. My basic question is, given some large connected RLC network (all linear and ideal elements) and two ports in the network, say 'a' and 'b', can the transfer-function between the ports have non-minimum phase zeros? More generally, is it true that every transfer function representing an RLC-circuit network is minimum phase? I suspect the answer is true, but I am having a hard time proving it. Thanks!
After taking an introductions to proofs course and abstract algebra, I have been trying to study from Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis. Unfortunately, I still find it very very difficult to read through Rudin let alone do the exercises. Sometimes I spend an entire week trying to understand a proof but get nowhere. At this point, would it be advisible to read a more introductory text in analysis or continue to work through Rudin? Or try reading some more abstract algebra?
I am studying English and I have a question. I found it in my text book written by some teacher who is not a native speaker. "Those who came first and in greatest numbers to make their homes on the eastern coast of North America were mostly from England." I do understand the meaning of this sentence, but I cannot understand why the word 'greatest', Superlative adjective, is not accompanied by the word "the". Is there any specific reason for that?
How do you parse the following sentence? The lamp by which she read the book grew dimmer. My friend says that "by which she read the book" qualifies "the lamp". So, it would basically mean "The lamp that she was using to read grew dimmer." For some reason, I comprehend the sentence as "The lamp that she was near while reading the book grew dimmer." Can it go both ways, or...? Also, about the usage of "grew dimmer" there, should it be "dimmed" instead? Thanks.
Look at the endings of the following words: blight, bought, breadth, brought, caught, delight, depth, fifth, fought, fourth, fright, freight, height, light, plight, taught, thought, width, ... As you may have already noticed, some of the words in that list end in ht, whereas the rest of them end in th. I have some questions regarding those endings: I. Do all words of the English language that end with ht end, actually, with ght? II. Is there any rule of thumb out there that helps one to recall (or determine) when the ending of a given word is th and not ht (or the other way around)? Thanks in advance for your insightful replies!
I'm well aware that bulwark refers to something used as a fortification or a defense. However, I was wondering if the word bulwarker is an acceptable word to use in English. I know it's possible to be a bulwark ("He built a bulwark upon the hill."), and I know you can bulwark something from something else ("I will do whatever I can to bulwark the attack."). However, I'm unsure if it is possible to be a bulwarker.
I am entering an interesting team based math contest called the purple comet, and quite a lot of questions on this contest involve Diophantine equations. For this contest, you are given a computer, and I was thinking of making a program that solved a linear Diophantine equation. The issue with this is that I can barely solve one by hand, much less make a rigorous algorithm to solve one. I am aware of Euclid's algorithm, but when the numbers get big, this method gets pretty inefficient, not to mention that it would be kind of a nasty thing to program. Are there any other smart algorithms out there for solving a linear Diophantine equation?
I was writing an essay when Word picked up an error in my writing; specifically, it wanted to replace "vast majority" with "clear majority." So my question is: is "clear majority" better, more eloquent, or clearer than "vast majority?" If so, how? A similar post here talks about the differences between similar expressions, but I want to know about the difference between "vast majority" and "clear majority."
When speaking about turbulence in fluid mechanics many times authors speak about "premultiplied energy spectra" but they never explain what really it is. I have searched for a definition but I did not manage to find it. I guess that is something related about the real energy contained in a region of scales when using a logarithm scale representation but I am not sure. So, what are these "premultiplied energy spectra"?
I have been looking around to find an answer to my question, but I was unable to find one that addressed my specific problem. I want to create the following sentence, but I'm not sure whether it's correct. "Not only the world has changed during this time but also we have in particular." I apologize in advance if I have overlooked an easy solution to this.
I'm looking for a term to accurately describe a person who can only read but cannot write. While I'm primarily concerned with people who have never learned to write, I would also be interested in any additional terms used to represent people who have lost the ability to write as a result of disuse. Both illiterate and unlettered imply an inability to read as well as to write.
I'm a bit confused. QFT is claimed to incorporate both Quantum Mechanics and Special Relativity. Therefore it should address the problem of non-locality caused by entanglement. However when I search for an answer on the Internet, I found nothing. I'm not complaining. But it seems that most people only use QFT to do some fancy particle stuff and forgot we should care more about the more fundamental stuff.
I've noticed that, when I'm driving and it's raining, the faster I go the more rain I get on the windshield and the faster I have to run the wipers to compensate. When I'm stopped at a red light I can just about turn the wipers off, but once we get moving again I have to turn them up so I can see clearly. Intuitively I would think that, assuming a statistically even distribution of rainfall throughout the local area, speed should not matter because for every raindrop I move into the path of, I'm moving out from under another one at the same time. But this is definitely not what I observe in actual driving conditions, so what's going on?
I am studying Linear Algebra. I have faced a problem to understand Symmetric Matrix with spectral decomposition. After I studied spectral decomposition, the next page in my book talks about a positive definite matrix and quadratic form. I am kind of lost what relationships are there between symmetric decomposition, a positive definite matrix, and quadratic form. Hope I can have some explanations. Thank you in advance.
According to Collins English Dictionary, and of course as everyone knows, a doula is a woman who is trained to provide support to women and their families during pregnancy, childbirth, and the period of time following the birth However, the definition in wiktionary says: A support person, usually female, who may not have medical or midwifery training, who provides emotional assistance to a mother or pregnant couple before, during or after childbirth. Is pregnant couple actually an acceptable term for referring to an expectant couple?
I'm about to wrap a course in partial differential equations. We've discussed the heat/wave equations and introductory Fourier Analysis. I'd like to do some reading into the field of thermodynamics. Would it be best to start with an introductory text given to most lower-division under graduates or should I begin with something with a little more meat on the bones? By meat on the bones, I mean a bit more rigor and explanation for the fundamental theorems and applications. If this is not clear enough please ask for clarification, I'll be glad to provide it.
I know that air pressure and temperature are inversely proportional. Now I saw in a book that "Atmospheric pressure decreases as we go higher and higher." But at greater heights the temperature becomes low, and so the air pressure would be high. But it is given atmospheric pressure decreases with altitude. I understand that air pressure and atmospheric pressure are different. But I can't understand how they are different.
Given two (or more) loans of different balances and interest rates and a single amount of funds available per payment period, is there a way to calculate the best way to split the available funds to minimize the amount of money repaid? I'm not really sure where to start to look into this type of question so if someone could point me in the right direction or provide an answer that would be great!
In my physics classes, I remember it being repeated a few times that gravity is a much weaker force than the other three fundamental forces, and being told this is an open problem in physics. However, I don't understand why this is a problem. I see no intrinsic reason why the four fundamental forces should have similar strengths in the first place. So why then is the fact that gravity is many orders of magnitude weaker than the other fundamental forces a problem? Note: I've attempted to read the Wikipedia article on the Hierarchy problem, but it is far too technical for me.
I'm reading a paper titled "Luminescence spectra of quantum dots in microcavities II Fermions" (link). In section III, the authors introduce so-called closing operators. I don't have enough background knowledge to understand the technique there. So it's natural for me to look for other literature or books on the topic. But it turns out the "closing operator" is defined only by these authors and I couldn't find any literature on this. Could you give me any key words which can lead me to related literature? Or you can point me directly to a literature.
Generally speaking when we say "our friend" we are referring to someone who is a friend of ours. However, I have noticed that at times these words are used sarcastically to refer to someone who is actually not a friend but an enemy/adversary. So with respect to the sentence below, is the term our friend used as a form of irony? Our friends the Saudis, who never persecute women, gays and other religious minority groups, have somehow managed to lead the UN Human Rights Council
I'm starting my last year of high school, and I will have to do an all year research on a mathematical topic. I'm a really passionate learner and I'm very involved in computer science. I am stuck on finding an idea that will both be challenging and fun. I would also really love to integrate computer science in it, since that's what I want to study afterwards. Thank you in advance.
Some dictionaries define a scalar as follows: A quantity, such as mass, length, or speed, that is completely specified by its magnitude and has no direction. -- The Free Dictionary However, it is my impression that in many contexts scalars can be signed, in which case their magnitude (their absolute value) does not specify its value. This definition is even used on a test question here. Is it true that this definition is inaccurate?
I'm currently taking a numerical analysis course. We are covering linear algebra topics, the gist of the first chapter of the course being solving systems of linear equations. The lecturer has introduced SVD decomposition, condition number of a matrix, LU decomposition and QR decomposition (using Householder decomposition). In the past I've been used to very rigorous, thorough and well-organized math courses. But I feel like what I'm learning here is shallow since there are very few proofs. So my question is Can you recommend rigorous textbooks or detailed lecture notes that cover the topics I mentioned above ?
So I'm trying to prove that the set of polynomials in C([a,b],R) is not open. I understand the definition of an open set, but I'm wondering how to find a point that is not contained in the interior if it's the set of polynomials. Also, Can a subset of a metric space ever be both open and dense? I'm thinking it can, only if the interior is empty. ? Would love help with these! Thanks in advance!
Why is a homogeneous function called homogeneous? When I ask this, I don't mean, "Show me how to algebraically manipulate a function whose input has been multiplied by a constant to get the original function multiplied by the same constant." I mean--why do we use the word "homogeneous"? That word in particular must have been chosen for a reason; what is it meant to communicate in this context?
I know how to solve linear homogeneous ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients using the differential operator D, by using this method. Is it possible to use a similar method (using the differential operator) to solve more advanced ODEs? I'm thinking of both more advanced linear ODEs, such as Euler-Cauchy differential equations, as well as non-linear ODEs. Are there any articles on the web on this topic, or even textbooks that use this method to solve ODEs?
One oddity I notice is that if a random or quasi-random data series such as price data is plotted, it is similar to a random walk, but if the same data series is plotted using candlesticks (open-close, high-low), there appears to be in many cases an undulating pattern. I assume that this is caused by some kind of aliasing. Is there a mathematical explanation for it?
I am an mechanical engineering student so I'm kind of ashamed to ask this question but I have a weak math background and am digging into some of my knowledge gaps. So my question is where are all of the constants of integration and why are they generally ignored? Is it simply because they are usually treated to be zero? I guess what I'm looking for is an intuition in regards to integration constants...i.e. how do I wrap my mind around why the integration constant is/was ignored, and how can I truly understand what is going on when these constants are ignored. Any insights or conversation is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
I don't know where I've heard such expression. I try to explain (for sales) what our software tool does and I use this sentence: "It helps you to deploy apps in a very simple fashion". And then I describe the steps of how it works. I googled this expression and I found only one reddit post. Is it a widely used expression in the US? Will native speakers understand me? What about non-native speakers like EU folks, will they? Can I rephrase it as "in the simplest possible fashion"? Thanks!
My background : I'm currently in my junior year in college majoring in astrophysics. I have taken GR, and some intro cosmology here and there, but nothing in great depth. I had my heart set on taking a full physical cosmology class this spring. As luck would have it, I can't take the physical cosmology class due to scheduling conflict ! I intend to proceed to graduate school in astrophysics, so I would have to take the graduate level cosmology then, but in the mean time, I was thinking of teaching myself undergrad cosmology out of Barbara Ryden's book. My question is : any advise for undergrads teaching themselves this subject matter ? Are there any "go to" resources? is Ryden a good choice?
I was wondering if it's possible to construct a table in LaTeX which has a fixed header so when we scroll down the page of the output PDF, we can still read the column names and keep track of what the numbers in the table represent. I have seen in a post here at stackoverflow about how to do this with HTML and someone had linked to this example: http://www.mustafaozcan.net/en/demo/fixedtableheader/jquery-fixedtableheader-demo-en.html I would like to be able to do that in a PDF produced by LaTeX. Is that possible?
I was doing some calculations in MATLAB, and noticed a pattern that may be obvious to stats experts, but I didn't notice it before. If I have a time-series, and I remove a linear trend / detrend it, I find that the mean of the detrended data is zero, as expected. However, I was surprised to find out that the standard deviation of both the detrended data and original data is roughly the same. Is this what one should expect? Thanks!
I am just beginning to read about the use of "Concave Programming" methods and use of the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions to identify the maximum value of a non-linear objective function subject to inequality constraints. The examples I have seen in the text I have at hand, all involve only linear constraints. Is this method equally applicable to situations where not only are there multiple constraints, but where one or more of those constraints are non-linear ?
Wikipedia has the following quote on John von Neumann: Stan Ulam, who knew von Neumann well, described his mastery of mathematics this way: "Most mathematicians know one method. For example, Norbert Wiener had mastered Fourier transforms. Some mathematicians have mastered two methods and might really impress someone who knows only one of them. John von Neumann had mastered three methods." He went on to explain that the three methods were: A facility with the symbolic manipulation of linear operators; An intuitive feeling for the logical structure of any new mathematical theory; An intuitive feeling for the combinatorial superstructure of new theories. And I am wondering what do 'logical structure' and 'combinatorial superstructure' mean in this context? Please explain these methods. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann#Mastery_of_mathematics
I am studying client's request arrival patterns on web and application servers. About web server's request arrival pattern I read that "The request arrival rate on web server follows Poisson distribution". And about application server I read the sentence "The request arrival rate on application server follows exponential distribution. Now kindly explain " is there any difference between Poisson and exponential distribution in the context of client's request arrival pattern on server". Is there any difference between poisson and exponential distributions?
I'm working on a project right now and part of the introduction is about energy, and I'm trying to introduce the notion of energy in an unconventional way. Right now, I am looking for examples of situations in physics and chemistry where energy plays a key role. Another way of putting it is: I am looking for questions where the answer is energy. I'm basically trying to motivate the concept of energy and demonstrate why it is important. Does anybody have ideas of seemingly fundamental occurrences where a true answer is provided by the notion of energy? Thanks!
When used as an expletive, the name Jesus Christ often gets an H inserted into the middle of it for some reason. I've heard lots of guesses about what the H stands for, the most popular one being Henry, but no one seems to actually know, and I've never gotten any good explanation of where it came from or why it became popular to insert it. Is there any documentation of when Jesus H. Christ as opposed to simply Jesus Christ came into currency as an expletive? Is there any authoritative explanation of what, if anything, the H was originally supposed to stand for?
In high school a while ago, I learned a bunch of random terms for words and phrases: synecdoche, antonym, oxymoron, palindrome, etc. There's one term that escapes me but I can give examples of it. I don't love my wife because she is beautiful but she is beautiful because I love her. We travel not to escape life, but for life not to escape us. What is the name of this term? Thanks in advance, it's killing me not being able to remember.
D-branes, as I currently understand them, are submanifolds of spacetime on which open strings can end with Dirichlet boundary conditions. On the other hand, type II string theory is a theory of oriented closed strings - the difference between IIA and IIB coming from the choice of GSO projection. Based on these observations, I have the following questions: If type II string theory is built from closed strings, why are D-branes considered in the theory? If open strings are included in type II, does the GSO projection act on the open strings? If so, how?
Trying to show that if a sequence converges, it either has a maximum, a minimum or both, I reached a dead-end. Assuming it is not constant, it is still bounded and its supremum and infimum aren't equal. Then I assumed that the supremum and infimum are not in the sequence. I want to show that there are two subsequences that converge to each of them but for that to happen I have to show they are accumulation points. I tried to use definition but failed. I know logically that following my assumption they have to be accumulation points but I can't derive it from the definitions. Any help?