Is it pureley by convention that the dollar symbol ($) comes before the value and the cent symbol (￠) come after? For example $1.50 vs $1 and 50￠  Also would it ever be correct to write a value of cents greater than 99, for example 101￠ ?
$1,000 is pronounced as "one thousand dollars". Reading from left to right, it seems like it would make more sense to write the value as: 1,000$. This way the pronunciation of the value follows the way it's written. Every other numerical value I can think of places the unit after the value:   1 kg 1 L 1 m, etc...   I'm not sure if this question fits in with the rest of the questions on this site. But I'd like to know why currencies are so different from other quantities. Not to mention the need to separate groups of three digits with commas.
Can the problem of unification of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity be converted into a pure Mathematical problem? I mean to say, can you make someone understand the problem who only knows Mathematics, even if a Physics description is absent? I mean, describing the problem with unification using pure Mathematical formulation.  Can we make the problem seem as if it has nothing to do with the real world and describe it only as a problem of mathematics? How to launch the default (native) application for a given file from Java? How do I create files using the lines in a .txt file? For example I have a file called fileNames.txt.  cat &gt;fileNames returns  abet  able  abacus   How do I use fileNames to create abet, able, and abacus as .txt files?  I tried using pipes with cat and touch. Merle the Wizard is fighting enemies with his friends on a bridge. He wants to cast a spell on the BBEG, but they are currently out of range and so he uses his action to ready a spell for when the BBEG is in range.  However, before that happens one of Merle's friends is knocked off the bridge. Can Merle ignore the spell he had readied and use his reaction to cast feather fall? Why Integer.getInteger does not work? How to Fix "Read-only file system" error when I run something as sudo and try to make a folder/file? I'm using the package braket for my physics notes, and this speeds things up a great deal but I'm constantly writing \ket{\psi} or \bra{\psi}, and because this specific pair of bra and ket appears so often, this gets repetitive and I would like a macro to speed this up.  However since the braket package works only in math mode, my attempt \newcommand{\ketp}{$\ket{\psi}}$ work when I'm writing in text mode, but when I'm writing in mathmode it breaks (unsurprisingly).  Is there any way I can get this command to work in both mathmode and textmode without having to define two different macros, one for each?    Thanks in advance for any help.  P.S. I'm certain this is a very simple question but I could find little to no explanation of this feature. Hi! I'm a beginner learner and I'd like to know how to snap these three objects. I'd like to snap the two cylinders with the different faces of the cube. The short one on the left and the highest cylinder on the top of the cube. I'd like to have the center of the cylinder aligned with the center of the cube (the base of the cylinder inscribed into the face of the cube)  I'm sorry for bad explanation I hope someone can help me  Thanks!   I add a screenshoot in which you can see what I have to do   Thanks again if someone can help me with this! What happened to the voting buttons? Starting from yesterday, the up-/downvote buttons seem to have moved from the left of a post towards above (in the middle) of the bodies of all questions and answers. Here is a screenprint of a sample (containing such buttons for both a question and an answer to it):    This happens on an iOS device (running 9.3.5), using various browsers and this in any SE site. No idea so far how it looks like in the most recent iOS version. Same for the (green) checkbox below those voting buttons (to mark an answer as accepted). Is this intended to be like this (IMO it looks ugly ... and a huge waste of available space), or is it rather some sort of CSS related issue that needs to be fixed? PS: Looking at the same page around the same time on a Win PC (using any of the common browsers) seems to work fine. Does an adjective or longer modifier apply to both nouns when they are joined with 'and' [or 'or']? In an exercise in Atiyah-Macdonald it asks to prove that the prime spectrum $\operatorname{Spec}(A)$ of a commutative ring $A$ as a topological space $X$ (with the Zariski Topology) is compact.   Now because the basic open sets $X_f = \{\mathfrak{p} \in \operatorname{Spec} (A) : \{f\} \not\subseteq \mathfrak{p} \}$ form a basis for the Zariski Topology it suffices to consider the case when   $$X = \bigcup_{i \in I} X_{f_i}$$   where $I$ is some index set. Then taking the complement on both sides we get that   $$\emptyset = \bigcap_{i \in I} X_{f_i}^c$$  so there is no prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ of $A$ such that all the $f_i$'s are in $\mathfrak{p}$. Now from here I am able to show that the ideal generated by the $f_i$'s is the whole ring as follows. Since there is no prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ such that all the $f_i \in \mathfrak{p}$, it is clear that there is no $\mathfrak{p}$ such that $(f_i) \subseteq \mathfrak{p}$ for all $i \in I.$ Taking a sum over all the $i$ then gives $$\sum_{i \in I} (f_i) = (1).$$  Now here's the problem:          How do I show from here that there is an equation of the form $1 = \sum_{i \in J} f_ig_i,$ where $g_i \in A$ and $J$ some finite subset of $I$?       This part has been giving me a headache. I am not sure if the finiteness bit has to do with algebra, topology or the fact that we are dealing with prime ideals.  This is not a homework problem but rather for self-study.  $\textbf{Edit:}$ I have posted my answer below after the discussion with Dylan and Pierre. Show only hidden files (dot files) in ls alias The formal solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation Consider the time-dependent  (or some equation in Schrödinger form) written down as $$ \tag 1 i \partial_{0} \Psi ~=~ \hat{ H}~ \Psi . $$ Usually, one likes to write that it has a formal solution of the form $$ \tag 2 \Psi (t) ~=~ \exp\left[-i \int \limits_{0}^{t} \hat{ H}(t^{\prime}) ~\mathrm dt^{\prime}\right]\Psi (0). $$ However, this form for the solution of $(1)$ is actually built by the method of successive approximations which actually returns a solution of the form $$ \tag 3 \Psi (t) ~=~ \hat{\mathrm T} \exp\left[-i \int \limits_{0}^{t} \hat{H}(t^{\prime})~\mathrm  dt^{\prime}\right]\Psi (0), \qquad t&gt;0, $$ where $\hat{\mathrm T}$ is the time-ordering operator.  It seems that $(3)$ doesn't coincide with $(2)$, but formally $(2)$ seems to be perfectly fine: it satisfies $(1)$ and the initial conditions. So where is the mistake? Precision of Coulomb's law Up to which precision has the coulomb law proven to be true? I.e.  if you have two electrons in a vacuum chamber, 5 meters appart, have the third order terms been ruled out? Are there any theoretical limits to measure the precision ( Planck's constant?). Obviously there are practical limitations ( imperfect vacuum, cosmic rays, vacuum fluctuation). Still, does anyone know what was the smallest amount ever correctly predicted by that law?    Edit : Summary  On the high end of the energy spectrum a precision of 10^-16 has been shown ( 42 years ago )  For electron point charges at large distances the law might brake down due to practical reasons.  For moving particles QED gives a correction to the law: This option, which was present in the "Mouse and Touchpad" settings panel in previous versions, is for some reason absent in 16.04 LTS. Does anyone know why this is, and/or how to fix it? Thanks. Where do the American and Japanese Transformers franchises meet? The original Transformers TV series was created by the American company Hasbro, and was adapted into Japanese as well. At some point, the Japanese franchise split off into its own continuity, launching its own set of sequels and spin offs.  The questions is: What part of the American franchise is considered canon by the Japanese one? Minor details such as name changes are not to be taken into consideration. How do I sort a list of dictionaries by a value of the dictionary? I have a list of dictionaries and want each item to be sorted by a specific value. Take into consideration the list: [{'name':'Homer', 'age':39}, {'name':'Bart', 'age':10}]  When sorted by name, it should become: [{'name':'Bart', 'age':10}, {'name':'Homer', 'age':39}] Enable ADB and/or change USB connection mode on Galaxy S7 w/ broken screen Which command should I use for displayed equations? A number of related questions have already been asked about this issue:       and even    But I'm still confused by the conflicting suggestions that have been given so far. So I'm trying again.  Which should be the preferred command to produce a displayed equation in my LaTeX documents?  So far the suggestions indicate that one should use \[ ... \], maybe \begin{equation*} ... \end{equation*}, or maybe even the gather* or align* environments from amsmath.  And one should definitely avoid using either $$...$$ or the eqnarray environment.  Now I have to say that, from a language perspective, I have a strong preference for the equation* environment because it is less cryptic than the \[ ... \] notation and it is  the most accurate.  So, is it fine to use equation*? Maybe only after loading amsmath? Or should the equation/equation* environment be redefined to something else so that spacing, package support, or whatever is improved? Delete data using 2 DialogForm