I am developing a search control, where user types in and it returns search results. When I get no matching result what message would be correct in that case?  a)  0 result  b)  0 results
When using zero as a quantifier, is it correct to use the singular form on the object of the quantifier, or the plural form?  It sounds confusing when I put it that way, but what I mean is: Which is correct?   Your password expires in 0 days. Your password expires in 0 day.   Essentially I suppose I'm asking, does "singular" mean "one" or "the opposite of more than one", as zero is not "plural" in the traditional "more than one" sense?  I'm pretty sure "days" sounds correct, but I can't be sure.
I unlocked the 'Files' button/icon from my unity launcher and now it disappearead and I cannot restore it or get it back I unlocked the 'Files' button for the Ubuntu file manager from the unity launcher and I cannot get it back.   When I run the file manager from the dash, the icon does not appear on the launcher like it does for all other applications while they are running. I wanted to have an empty launcher when no applications are running, and just have the icons of those I am actively using there.  Any idea why I don't see it in the launcher when its running or how to lock it back? What is the limit of this sequence? How does it relate to the exponential function? Find $$\lim_{n\to\infty} \left(1+\frac{x^2}{n^2}\right)^n$$   I particular, I am hoping to find the above to be $1+x^kg(x/n)$ where $g(\cdot)$ is a function with uniformly bounded derivatives.  Edit: I'm trying to prove a result that would be true if  $(1+x^2/n^2)^n -1 = x^kO(x/n).$ NOR Gate is Working Correctly with Vcc Pin Disconnected Calculation of limit without stirling approximation $\lim n^n/(e^nn!)=0$ using Stirling approximation it is obvious. But can we do it without using Stirling approximation.  Now series with terms $x^n n^n/n!$ has ROC $1/e$. What we can say about behaviour of power series at endpoints? When is a function too long? When IE10 is set as my default browser, double-clicking an internet shortcut (*.url file) opens it in a new tab of the existing IE window. However, when it is not the default, every way of opening a *.url that I've tried brings up a new IE window per file. Is it possible to keep opening files in new tabs of the same IE window when it's not set as the default browser, and how?  What I've tried and it didn't work:   "C:\Program Files (x86)\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" "C:\Dir1\file.url" (opens a new window every time) C:\Windows\System32\rundll32.exe "C:\Windows\System32\ieframe.dll",OpenURL C:\Dir1\file.url (opens the default browser) classexec "C:\Dir1\file.url" --class htmlFile (using  utility, opens a new window every time)   I use Windows 7 x64. How rare are magic items and how many should I be handing out? Should we host our own nameservers? This is a  about whether to outsource DNS resolution for ones own domains   I currently have my ISP providing DNS for my domain, but they impose limitations on adding records. Therefore, I am thinking about running my own DNS.  Do you prefer to host your own DNS, or is it better to have your ISP do this?  Are there alternatives which I can look into? What does ':' (colon) do in JavaScript? Lightsaber blade "weight" in-universe Is there a secular, non vulgar alternative to "for heaven's sake"? I know for heaven's sake, for Pete's sake, for God's sake and for Christ's sake. All of those, however are religious references. The only non-religious equivalent phrases I know are for fuck's sake and its variations. Are there any non-vulgar, non-religious alternatives? I am very used to the general construct of for X's sake and am looking for something along the same lines that I could use in cases like  C'mon, it's just a scratch for X's sake! That's not even true for X's sake!  It does not need to also be applicable as a general exclamation of frustration (Oh, for chrissake!) but that would be nice. Basically, I'm looking for a synonym for the &quot;Oh come on!&quot; sense of for fuck's sake rather than the Oh shit! one.  EDIT: Since this has gotten quite a bit of attention, I would like to urge those who answer to read the entire question, not just the title. I am not just looking for polite swearwords but for something that can be used in the example phrases above. Should flagging a question for closure prevent close-voting? Should we allow adding rep to bounties to extend their duration? There are a few variables here that I was thinking about:   Spend rep to extend a bounty for a certain amount of time Allow the rep spent to extend duration to add into the original bounty Create minimums on the amount necessary to extend dependent on how long it has been up   These are just ideas and can be tweaked as necessary, but the idea in whole is to encourage people to spend more on rep and avoid "wasted" rep because there wasn't a good answer to a question while minimizing the amount of possible abuse. This was part of the idea to spend a small amount of rep to extend duration without adding to the rep so that you wouldn't have to spend the whole amount over again for a couple more days.  The typical use case that I am thinking of is when you create a bounty and it still gets no attention. I think it would be cool if you could then add onto it to turn it into a higher bounty instead of having those points completely gone.  Possible abuses:   Keeping bounty questions alive for inappropriately long times. There is already an answer but the author does not want to award the bounty.   For 1, you can resolve this by increasing the amount necessary to keep a question alive exponentially similar to what is already in place. You could also halve the amount of extended duration per extension. For 2, this is a problem with the existing system as well, but the author does not have a positive incentive not to award the points since he himself still cannot get them back. Looking for a Pre-1975, young adult, sci-fi, colored circle dimension crossing Looking for the title and or author of a long ago favorite; I have searched the web for it on and off for years.  I read a paperback novel about 40 years ago; it was probably a used book at that time. Probably pre-1975 publication.  In my memory it was written in the style of Andre Norton I have looked through her , but I am not finding it. It was a young adult sci-fi novel.  Plot; a young woman (gender was not strong, but I remember the main character being female) can see different colored circles floating around. When she looks at them just right, she can jump through to another universe.  In the other universe, things change.  She might become a lion, or maybe she is carrying a seed that becomes a net in the other universe.   Two bad guys are chasing her around the different dimensions, I recall one scene where they are all sliding down an icy slope and she jumps through a portal, to escape the bad guys.   There were a lot of complexities about, dimensions, what became what, different colors of portals and such. Can you prove that if $p$ is a prime greater than $5$, then the sum of the squares of the quadratic nonresidues modulo $p$ is divisible by $p$?  Note that I have just proved that the sum of the quadratic residues modulo $p$ is divisible by $p$ for $p$ greater than $3$. Donating winning lottery ticket to 501(c)3 Private Foundation: cost-basis deduction + full tax free redemption for foundation? US 501(c)3 Private Foundations are typically controlled by the primary donator, so that is a nice perk, but in exchange for that perk I realize the tax deductions for donating are significantly lowered than for charities. Aside from being lower, the tax code doesn't recognize appreciated property and only allows for a deduction based on the donating taxpayer's cost-basis: ie. the price they paid for the property no matter its current market value.  When there is a significant delta of price paid vs current redeemable value, it seems this can still be a perk for the donating taxpayer in some circumstances, such as with lottery tickets that are known winners already.  If the donating taxpayer pays $1 for the ticket. Their cost basis is $1. If the ticket is now worth $100,000,000 but has not been redeemed, is it accurate that the donating taxpayer can donate this to their private foundation for a deduction at cost basis, and the private foundation can redeem the $100,000,000 ticket completely exempt from all lottery withholding income taxes?   (Other taxes unique to private foundations are known and outside the scope of this question.)  Most literature I can find is about appreciated marketable securities, and occasionally real estate. It doesn't seem that the tax code specifies any distinction between property, but it also doesn't seem the answer to this question is part of the general collective conscious even if it really is that obvious if my understanding is already correct. Identify $E(X\mid X+Y)$ for $X$ and $Y$ independent and Poisson I am currently trying to understand how does an instance of the EM algorithm is derived when there are "hidden variables" in this old paper: .  I don't really understand how the expectation step is derived, and what bothers me the most, is that I cannot prove the following statement (right before 2.11):  $$ \mathbb{E}[X|X+Y] = \frac{(X+Y)\lambda_X}{\lambda_X+\lambda_Y} $$  where $X \sim Poisson\{\lambda_X\}$ and $Y \sim Poisson\{\lambda_Y\}$  To begin, I wrote the discrete expectation as follows: $$ \mathbb{E}[X|X+Y] = \sum_{k=1}^{X+Y} k P(X=k|X+Y)\\ = \sum_{k=0}^{X+Y} k \frac{P(X+Y|X=k)P(x)}{P(X+Y)} $$  Where I can replace $$ P(X+Y=k) = \frac{(\lambda_X+\lambda_Y)^ke^{-(\lambda_X+\lambda_Y)}}{k!}$$ $$ P(k=x) = \frac{\lambda_X^xe^{-\lambda_X}}{x!}$$ $$ P(X+Y=k|x) = P(Y=x-k) = \frac{\lambda_Y^{x-k}e^{-\lambda_Y}}{(x-k)!}$$  but I dont really know how to mix that together, because I don't really see what does the event $X+Y$ stands for, and how does it rely on the x in the integral ?  Thank you very much for you help Why is 3D stress tensor acting only on three surfaces? I'm trying to learn about the stress tensor (in 3D)    The tensors are said to have directions (the first subindex $i$ in $\sigma_{ij}$) and specify the surface upon which they act (the second subindex $j$ in $\sigma_{ij}$).  What confuses me is why is it defined only to act on three surfaces, even when the cube has six surfaces? Constructing a circle through a given point, tangent to a given line, and tangent to a given circle While browsing around about problems similar to , I have found references to constructions of all types of circles. For example, not only is it possible to construct a circle tangent to three given circles, but one can construct a circle through any three points, tangent to any three lines, passing through two given points and tangent to a line or circle, passing through a given point and tangent to two given lines or circles, etc. Pretty much any combination of criteria regarding points, lines, and circles, with repetition.  Can we have one of each? I haven't found any resource saying whether it's possible or not to construct a circle through a given point, tangent to a given line, and tangent to a given circle. Is such a construction possible? Thanks. How can I swap or replace multiple strings in code at the same time?