Help the mesh is moving at the wrong part when I move the bone!
I have an armature set up, but the bones aren't moving the mesh properly  The mesh and armature:    The vertex group of the bone I am going to move:    As you can see, the circled region doesn't belong to the vertex group. But, when I move the bone look what happens:    That part of the mesh has moved with the bone.. Why?
What would you call someone who makes no lasting impression? How can I see the "implementation" of protected commands such as \LaTeX? After reading another question relating to how to see definitions of commands, I tried:  \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \show\LaTeX \end{document}   But this shows me in my logfile:  \LaTeX=macro: \protect \LaTeX   I just want to see where the \LaTeX command deep down somewhere finally says "OK, make the 'L' big, then make a little raised 'a,' then ..." Anonymous questions and Avatars Some Stack Exchange sites allow to ask an anonymous question by specifying a one-time user name and an email which is "required, but never shown". However the Gravatar attached to the email is shown anyway. Anonymous users do not want their picture to appear - someone can find their identity via google image search or someone that knows them.  Example: open incognito window and : How can I securely format a solid-state drive? What is this type of flexible contact strip called? The LCD below is from a cheap digital clock which was (obviously) damaged (broken glass).    The electrical connection between the PCB and the display was realized with this pink strip.    Its flexible...    ...and consists of alternating rows of conductive and insulating material between the pink boarders.    [above image was altered in contrast/brightness to highlight the alternating strips]  What is this kind of connector called? Is it only used for displays?   I am pretty impressed that the connection is reliable just from the very slight pressure between the strip and the PCB. Also, its easily removable from the display. There seems to be some conductive layer on the glass, from where the signal goes into the displays internals. This connection seems to be damaged for the three rightmost signals, where the glass is broken. "Reality" of EM waves vs. wavefunction of individual photons - why not treat the wave function as equally "Real"? In thinking how to ask this question (somewhat) succinctly, I keep coming back to a Microwave Oven.  A Microwave Oven has a grid of holes over the window specifically designed to be smaller in diameter than the wavelength of the microwaves it produces, yet larger than the wavelengths of the visible light spectrum - this is so you can watch your food being heated without getting an eye full of microwaves.  The "realness" of electromagnetic waves seems indisputable - both from the microwave example above, and also because if I want to broadcast a radio wave with a certain wavelength, then I need to make sure I have an antenna of corresponding length to produce the wave I'm looking for.  Furthermore, we discuss and treat these waves as real, measurable "objects" that exist and can be manipulated.     Now, if I want to describe the behavior of my Microwave Oven in the framework of QM (let's pretend my oven is going to only produce 1 photon of energy corresponding to a wavelength of the microwave spectrum for simplicity) then I'll describe the behavior of that photon as a wavefunction that evolves over time and gives a probability distribution within my microwave that similarly does not allow the photon to pass through the safety grid and exit the oven cavity giving me a retinal burn.  The difference is, the wavefunction is never treated as something "real" in this description.  When the safety grid is described as working to protect you because it has holes smaller than the wavelength of the classical waves it's blocking, this is a useful description that seems to describe "real" objects/be-ables.  While it is possible to describe why an individual photon has low probability of passing through the same grid but extended physical properties such as wavelength (in space) are treated as non-real because we're dealing with a point particle and with behavior described by something we also treat as non-real (the wavefunction); it seems unclear to me why we insist this wave function which predicts behavior of physical measurements so well is somehow "non-real."    Put another way, if we have no problem treating EM waves as "Real," then why do we insist on treating the wavefunction that describes the same behavior as "unreal?"  I understand there is recent research (Eric Cavalcanti and his group for one) trying to argue this point, but as every respectable physics professor, I've ever encountered, has treated the wavefunction as an indisputably non-real mathematical tool, I needed to ask this community for an answer. Show that the Sorgenfrey line does not have a countable basis. I am trying to understand this proof from Munkres' book which shows that the Sorgenfrey line does not have a countable basis. His proof is:  Let $\beta$ be a basis for $\mathbb{R}_l$. Choose for each $x$ an element $B_x \in \beta$ such that $x \in B_x \subset [x, x+1)$. If $y$ is not equal to $x$ then $B_y \neq B_x$ since inf($B_x$) = $x$ and $y$ = inf($B_y$). Therefore $\beta$ must be uncountable.   I am new to topology so I am probably just missing a simple point but I do not see why $\beta$ must be uncountable according to this argument. I agree that $B_y \neq B_x$ but isn't it possible that $y \in B_x$ (and thus the set $B_y$ is not needed as part of the basis)? Thanks in advance for your help. I'm having an odd issue - When I try to zoom in on a detail using my MMB, the "camera" in the 3D view seems to be cutting off the exterior surface of my object and showing me the inside instead. I'd expect this behavior, but only when I was much more zoomed in.  If I zoom out a bit (one click on the scroll wheel) then I can see the exterior as I intend.  Is there any way to adjust this behavior?  Thanks! How to know if something is a primitive concept, a law, a definition or a theorem Some basic Physics books are often misguiding in the sense that they don't make clear whether something is a primitive concept, a law, a definition or a theorem. This is often a little confusing. I've asked here some moments ago if there's a definition of force, and I've been redirected to a question about whether Newton's Laws are laws or definitions of mass and force.  This is just an example, but there are many others, like for instance, the conservation of energy, which some books present as a theorem, and some places says that this is a law of Physics. Time on the other hand, is something that according to Feynman's lectures on Physics, cannot be defined, so we just say how to measure it and leave it as a primitive concept.  In this context: how in general can we identify whether something is a primitive concept, a fundamental law of Physics, a definition or a theorem? Testing random variate generation algorithms Which methods are used for testing random variate generation algorithms? Hi im new to Blender and i want to know when im in edit mode if i can copy or cut a selections of polygons faces and paste to another mesh.  Thanks in advance for any help How do I list all files under a directory recursively and sort the output by modification time?  I normally use ls -lhtc but it doesn't find all files recursively. I am using Linux and Mac.  ls -l on Mac OS X can give  -rw-r--r--    1 fsr  user      1928 Mar  1  2011 foo.c -rwx------    1 fsr  user      3509 Feb 25 14:34 bar.c   where the date part isn't consistent or aligned, so a solution have to take this into account.  Partial solution  stat -f "%m%t%Sm %N" ./* | sort -rn | head -3 | cut -f2-   works, but not recursively. How are reviews assigned? Can the Dispel Magic spell be Readied to counter an opponent's spell? When playing as a spellcaster, is it valid the use of the Ready action to prepare Dispel Magic to counter a spell cast by an opponent? In the same vein, when declaring said action, do I have to specify which spell slot I will use when Readying the Dispel Magic spell? If that is the case, does this tactic nullify an opponent's spell? I get the impression that this is basically turning Dispel Magic into a spell with a casting time of &quot;1 reaction&quot;. Is my reading of the rules accurate? I set a command block to /tp. It was supposed to activate only if you had 0 time left, and to activate the command block with a hopper clock to keep giving it power.   But it is not checking if you have 0 time left, so it keeps teleporting me. I can't get close enough to the command block to break it, so I'm stuck in a neverending teleport loop.  Any ideas? I need to find limit points of the set $\{  \frac{1}{n} +\frac{1}{m} \mid n, m = 1,2,3,\dots \}$.  My try :   If both $m$ and $n$ tend to very large values say $\infty$ then the value of $\{ \frac{1}{n} +\frac{1}{m} \}$ tends to $0$, and if only one of $m$ or $n$ tends to very large values, then the set $\{ \frac{1}{n} \mid n=1,2,3,\dots\} $ acts as limit points.   So is it true that a set of limit points is $\{0\}$ $\cup$  $\{\frac{1}{k} \mid k=1,2,3,\dots \}$?  How should I write this proof rigorously? Do the topologies with the same convergent sequences coincide? Do the same sequential convergence in two topologies the result are the same topologies? Let $X$ be topological  space with topologies $\tau$, $\tau'$. Let $(x_{n})\in X$ and $x\in X$ and $(x_{n})\rightarrow x$ with $\tau$ if and only if $(x_{n})\rightarrow x$ with $\tau'$. Do the two topologies on $X$ coincide? Basic photo editing on OS X Will fruit/seed of a bonsai yield another bonsai plant/tree? With practice one can create a bonsai; no complicated modification of the DNA in a high-end lab required. The bonsai will even beget bonsai fruit.   What I am curious about is - if such bonsai fruit is planted again, will it give rise to a normal, or a bonsai tree? unable to use synaptic via launcher When I open synaptic via launcher on gnome-panel, it opens and asks me for the password but if I enter the password, it says its wrong even though the password is correct and it used to work OK few days ago. If I open synaptic via terminal using sudo synaptic then it opens OK without any problem.