I simplified the above problem to  Prove$$\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n-k}\frac{(-1)^i}{(k-1)!\,i!}\right)=1$$  Here $p_n(k)$ denotes number of permutations of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$ such that we have k fixed points.  How to proceed?
Let $S = \{1,2,\dots,n\}$. Then $i \in S$ is said to be a fixed point of a permutation $p$ or $S$ if $p(i) = i$. Let $P_n(k) $ be the number of permutations of $S$ which have $k$ fixed point. Prove that $\sum_{k=0}^nk\cdot P_{n}(k) = n!$.
iPhone asks for Mac password (or Mac asks for iOS password) During iPhone update to iOS 10.3.1, I was asked for my password using the correct machine name for my Mac mini. To be clear, the request was not for my iCloud password, my actual local user account password for macOS. This can also happen in the other direction - setting up a Mac may ask for verification for you to enter your iPhone / iPad passcode (and not your iCloud password)  I could not find any information about this kind of access. I was thinking it was security for iCloud and possibly related to two step authorization or two factor authorization. This is the first time I can think of that I entered a desktop password outside of that actual desktop.  I don't have a screen shot but I recall an implication that some files in my Mac are encrypted and need my password. '... need to enter the password for .'   Are there settings I can I control this assuming it's a legitimate part of iCloud setup process or iOS setup process? What is it called when you use many words to describe the word you want to use? What is it called when you use many words to describe the word you want to use?  I know there is a technical word that's used in foreign language acquisition that means using many words to describe a word you don't know.  I'm doing it now, just talking and beating around the bush until someone can tell me the word I'm looking for. Any group of index 2 is normal I'm trying to understand the proof that any group of index $2$ is normal.   Let $G$ be a group and $H$ a subgroup of index $2$.  I understand that if $x\in H$ then $xH=H=Hx$ since $H$ is a subgroup. However, I don't understand why if $x\in G\setminus H$ then $xH=G\setminus H.$  I know there are other proofs of this on this site but none of them specifically address this question. Lie Algebra of U(N) and SO(N) U(N) and SO(N) are quite important groups in physics. I thought I would find this with an easy google search. Apparently NOT! What is the Lie algebra and Lie bracket of the two groups? When should you use a class vs a struct in C++? Canonical Post #2: What is the perfect, and how should I use it? In thinking about Sturm-Liouville theory a bit I see I have no actual idea what is going on.  The first issue I have is that my book began with the statement that given  $$L[y] = a(x)y'' + b(x)y' + c(x)y = f(x)$$  the problem $L[y] \ = \ f$ can be re-cast in the form $L[y] \ = \ \lambda y$.  Now it could be a typo on their part but I see no justification for the way you can just do that!  More importantly though is the motivation for Sturm-Liouville theory in the first place. The story as I know it is as follows:  Given a linear second order ode   $$F(x,y,y',y'') = L[y] = a(x)y'' + b(x)y' + c(x)y = f(x)$$  it is an exact equation if it is derivable from a differential equation of one order lower, i.e.  $$F(x,y,y',y'') = \frac{d}{dx}g(x,y,y').$$  The equation is exact iff  $$a''(x) - b'(x) + c(x) = 0. $$  If $F$ is not exact it can be made exact on multiplication by a suitable integrating factor $\alpha(x)$.  This equation is exact iff  $$(\alpha(x)a(x))'' - (\alpha(x)b(x))' + \alpha(x)c(x) = 0 $$  If you expand this out you get the Adjoint operator  $$L^*[\alpha(x)] \ = \ (\alpha(x)a(x))'' \ - \ (\alpha(x)b(x))' \ + \ \alpha(x)c(x) \ = 0 $$  If you expand $L^*$ you see that we can satisfy $L \ = \ L^*$ if $a'(x) \ = \ b(x)$ &amp; $a''(x) \ = \ b'(x)$ which then turns $L[y]$ into something of the form  $$L[y] \ = \ \frac{d}{dx}[a(x)y'] \ + \ c(x)y \ = \ f(x).$$  Thus we seek an integratiing factor $\alpha(x)$ so that we can satisfy this &amp; the condition this will hold is that $\alpha(x) \ = \ \frac{1}{a(x)}e^{\int\frac{b(x)}{a(x)}dx}$  Then we're dealing with:  $$\frac{d}{dx}[\alpha(x)a(x)y'] \ + \ \alpha(x)c(x)y \ = \ \alpha(x)f(x)$$  But again, by what my book said they magically re-cast this problem as  $$\frac{d}{dx}[\alpha(x)a(x)y'] \ + \ \alpha(x)c(x)y \ = \ \lambda \alpha(x) y(x)$$  Then calling  $$\frac{d}{dx}[\alpha(x)a(x)y'] \ + \ ( \alpha(x)c(x)y \ - \ \lambda \alpha(x) )y(x) \ = \ 0$$  a Sturm-Liouville problem.  My question is, how can I make sense of everything I wrote above? How can I clean it up &amp; interpret it, like at one stage I thought we were turning our 2nd order ode into something so that it reduces to the derivative of a first order ode so we can easily find first integrals then the next moment we're pulling out eigenvalues &amp; finding full solutions - what's going on? I want to be able to look at $a(x)y'' \ + \ b(x)y' \ + \ c(x)y \ = \ f(x)$ &amp; know how &amp; why we're turning this into a Sturm-Liouville problem in a way that makes sense of exactness &amp; integrating factors, thanks for reading! vertical alignment of text in tikz node The output from the following script \documentclass{article} \usepackage{tikz} \usepackage{graphicx} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture}   \node(title)[text width = 0.25\textwidth, text height = 3 cm, draw]{title};   \end{tikzpicture} \end{document}  is  How can I vertically align the text in the node? Specifying the text depth as in \node(title)[text width = 0.25\textwidth, text height = 1cm, text depth = 1 cm, draw]{     title line 1\\     title line 2\\     title line 3};  Does not result in the text being vertically centred. What is the limit of What is the difference between weight and mass? What is the difference between the weight of an object and the mass of an object? Can the definite article be omitted when referring to a person qualified by a noun? Does the proof of Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem require axiom of choice? When selecting the terms of subsequence from each bisections, I thought axiom of choice might be required. But I'm not so sure whether or not, so please tell me. [edited] I'm sorry for the lack of explanation. I want to prove this statement: Let $a_1, a_2, \ldots \in \mathbf{R}$, and $(a_n)_{n\in\mathbf{N}}$ is bounded, then $(a_n)$ has some convergent subsequence.  The proof is as follows. Since $(a_n)$ is bounded, for all $n\in\mathbf{N}$,   $a_n \in I = [b, c]$.  Now, let $I_0 = I$ and if $I_n = [b_n, c_n]$,  we define $d_n = (b_n+c_n)/2$ and  if infinite terms of $(a_n)$ is included in $[b_n, d_n]$(resp. $[d_n, c_n]$), we will define  $I_{n+1} = [b_n, d_n]$(resp. $[d_n, c_n]$).If both intervals contain infinite terms, let $I_{n+1}$ be $[d_n, c_n]$. For all $n\in \mathbf{N}$, infinite numbers of $m \in \mathbf{N}$ exist such that $a_m \in I_n$ suffices. We take the sequence of natural numbers $(n(k))_{k\in\mathbf{N}}$which suffices $n(0) &lt; n(1) &lt; \cdots &lt; n(k) &lt; \cdots$ following this procedure: Now we have already selected $a_{n(1)}, \ldots, a_{n(k)}$, there are infinite numbers of $m\in \mathbf{N}$ which suffices $n(k)&lt;m, a_m \in I_{k+1}$, so let's take the minimum m out of it. Applying this process recursively, we obtain a infinite convergent subsequence(?). I think intuitively, by only repeating this process we can't obtain countable infinite terms of subsequence because we have to repeat infinite times. FTP client on windows that save session password in encrypted text Filezilla or WinSCP save password in plain text which is unsecured on public machines. Is there any FTP client can save and encrypt password so that people using it only can access to FTP but not able to see password? Thanks! Margin of caption different than text body in 2-column table (cas-dc) Regarding the ellipsoid computed by using the "lifting step" I need your expertise in understanding and hopefully solving the following problem:  Let $C \subset \mathbb{R}^d$, and lets assume that $C$ is not centrally symmetric, thus when computing the $MVEE(C)$ (i.e the minimum volume enclosing ellipsoid), they use the following "lifting step":  $$ C^\prime = \left\lbrace \pm \begin{bmatrix} x\\ 1 \end{bmatrix} \middle| x \in C \right\rbrace,$$ where $C^\prime$ is centrally symmetric.  It is proven that for any $\varepsilon &gt; 0$, $MVEE(C^\prime) \cap \Pi$ is a $(1 + \varepsilon)$-approximation to $MVEE(C) \times \left\lbrace 1 \right\rbrace$, where $\Pi = \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R^{d+1}} \middle| x_{d+1} = 1 \right\rbrace$.  Let $G \in \mathbb{d \times d}$ be an invertible matrix, let $ v \in \mathbb{R}^d$ such that the pair $(G,v)$ represents the matrix and the center of $MVEE(C)$ respectively. Let $\hat{G} \in \mathbb{R}^{(d + 1) \times (d + 1)}$ be an invertible matrix such that the pair $(\hat{G},\overset{\to}{0})$ represents the matrix and center of $MVEE(C^\prime)$ respectively.  Then, $\forall x \in MVEE(C)$ $$ \left| \left| \left[ x , 1 \right] \hat{G} \begin{bmatrix} x\\1 \end{bmatrix} \right| \right|_2 = (1 + \varepsilon) \cdot \left| \left| (x - v) G (x - v)^T \right| \right|_2 .$$  Regarding $x \not\in MVEE(C) $, then it is easy to see that the above term is not satisfied and moreover the right term is bigger or equal to the left term.  What I need to know is whether it possible the bound the right term by the left term (maybe because $MVEE(C) \times \left\lbrace 1 \right\rbrace \subseteq MVEE(C^\prime)$), i.e. $$ poly(d) \cdot \left| \left| \left[ x , 1 \right] \hat{G} \begin{bmatrix} x\\1 \end{bmatrix} \right| \right|_2 \geq (1 + \varepsilon) \cdot \left| \left| (x - v) G (x - v)^T \right| \right|_2 \ ?$$  Please Do correct if I am wrong and thanks in advance. Similar matrices and minimal polynomial What are the rules for calling the base class constructor? Number of elements in the quotient ring $\mathbb{Z}[X]/(X^2-3, 2X+4)$ An example of a lattice that's not totally ordered I'm thinking about installing Ubuntu Desktop, but I don't know what flavor is the best for my system. What are the minimum and recommended hardware requirements? What kind of CPU? How much memory? Should I have Hardware Acceleration? What flavor should I use?  This is an attempt of a canonical answer. My answers have the &quot;official  requirements&quot;, the recommended are a mix of official sources and opinion based (along with the answer it's told the source). You can comment or edit if you feel that the information is obsolete or incomplete. It is a good rule of thumb that any system capable of running Windows Vista, 7, 8, x86 (Intel) OS X will almost always be a lot faster with any Ubuntu flavor even if they are lower-spec than described below.