My 8gb USB drive just became 4mb. I already tried the diskpart method, bootice, HP USB Storage Format. But still the capacity still the same. Is there other way?
After writing the FreeNAS IMG to a 16 GB USB flash drive, I can now only use 938 MB. I used the Win32 Disk Imager tool to write the IMG to the device. Then later, when I inserted the the USB drive into my Windows 7 computer it said that it had to be formatted, because it couldn't read it. I believe this is normal. So I formatted it inside Windows using the format option when prompted. So in Windows Explorer now, 938 MB is reported as capacity of this device.    Also, when i check the properties dialog box I can see the same numbers.    And when I check with diskmgmt.msc I can see there are several volumes I don't recognize and unallocated space of 12.79 GB.    Now, I have another 2 GB USB flash drive with the same problem. It too was used for FreeNAS, and it too has a reported capacity of only 938 MB. I thought it was broken there for a while, until I saw the same problem with this 16 GB model.  I tried using diskpart on the 2 GB model, and I saw that there were several partitions there (list partitions) just like on this one. So I used the clean option to try to wipe it, but that wiped off everything so it's totally useless now. I'm not sure how to rebuild it.  Is this a standard routine, like part of the whole "user experience", that whenever you make a bootable USB falsh drive with FreeNAS, it messes up your device? I am new to FreeNAS, so i wouldn't know. But it sure looks like it. Maybe it is in fact the format operation in Windows that messes things up... I don't know. It's not very nice.  How do I restore the capacity back to 16 GB-ish (14.9 GiB)?
I have run into a conundrum.   When I go to get some friends cans of beer I say:     You guys want a beer?   When I am referring to going to a bar and drinking some I say:     Let's go get some beers!   When I go to a store to buy beer I say:     I am going to get beer.   How can I work this out? My friend is a native Chinese speaker and this is the sort of plural thing that trips her up. How is this explained? What are good ways to make pdflatex output copy-and-pasteable? Suppose I have 30 numbers that vary between 0 and 1.0 and which sum to 1.0.  The mean is obviously 0.033.  A client wants these scaled to lie between 0 and 1.0 but to have a mean of 0.5.  By the way, I'll probably have to do this for any set of numbers (positive, negative, outside the range 0 - 1) so that they lie in the range 0 - 1 and have a mean 0.5.  Any suggestions? Includegraphics maximum width Generally accepted root mean square (RMS) error for rectifying topographic maps This is a generic inquiry on the common practice/standard for determining the acceptable values of RMS when georeferencing topographic maps.  Is there an absolute value?  Some literature suggests that it should be "less than or equal to 1/2 of the side of a cell which make up the total resolution of the image." Is there an official rule that the minimum damage can't be negative? A slightly humorous thought occurred to me (a recovering rules lawyer) after reading .     "None of the answers actually specify that 0 is the minimum damage."   Logically it wouldn't make sense for an attack to apply negative damage or healing, except in specific cases like hitting a flame elemental with a fire attack. Ruling that you could do negative damage would lead to an exploit to avoid costs of healing. As such I highly doubt any DM would make such a ruling. I definitely wouldn't except for the most absurd and humorous of games were failure is the expected result not success.  Another possibility (as suggested by Secespitus) is that negative damage would reflect back on the attacker. This could be seen as punching a strongman so hard (or in just the wrong way) as to injure your own hand.  This would also play well in a failure is the only option game, and if there is a rule suggesting that it would be an appropriate answer to this question as well.  Take the case of a person with less than 8 Strength, no levels in monk, and does not have a tavern brawler.  Would they do -1(1 - 2) damage on unarmed strikes? If so what would the result of the negative damage be?   "Healing" the target because such a puny hit actually raises their fighting spirits and makes them more capable of fighting Reflective Damage, the attacker actually takes 1 point of damage, representing injury to his hand or other damage   I am curious to know if there is an official rule stating that the minimum damage an attack can do is 0 or is there something in the damage calculation that I am missing that would otherwise prevent negative damage? How to derive $[x_i, F(\vec p)] = i \hbar \frac {\partial F(\vec p)}{\partial p_i}$ indicates that the following relation is &quot;easily shown&quot;: $[x_i, F(\vec p)] = i \hbar \frac {\partial F(\vec p)}{\partial p_i}$, however I'm having some trouble showing it.  I think I'm just messing up the multivariable Taylor expansion (of $F(\vec p)$).  Can one of you walk me through it or link me to site that will?  Thanks.  Edit: Here's what I get (without using $x=i\hbar \frac \partial {\partial p}$ which I haven't proven yet): $$F(\vec p) = F(\vec 0) + \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_j}p_j + \frac 12 \sum^3_{k=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial^2 F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_k \partial p_j} p_j p_k + \dots$$ so $$(x_iF(\vec p) - F(\vec p)x_i)\psi$$ $$= x_i[F(\vec 0)\psi -i\hbar \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_j}(\nabla \psi)_j + \hbar^2\frac 12 \sum^3_{k=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial^2 F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_k \partial p_j} (\nabla \psi)_j (\nabla \psi)_k + \dots]$$ $$- [F(\vec 0)x_i\psi -i\hbar \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_j}(\nabla x_i\psi)_j + \hbar^2\frac 12 \sum^3_{k=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial^2 F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_k \partial p_j} (\nabla x_i\psi)_j (\nabla x_i\psi)_k + \dots]$$ where $$(\nabla x_i\psi)_j=\frac {\partial x_i}{\partial x_j}\psi + x_i\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j} = \delta_{ij}\psi + x_i\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j}$$ and $$(\nabla x_i\psi)_j(\nabla x_i\psi)_k=(\delta_{ij}\psi + x_i\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j})(\delta_{ik}\psi + x_i\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_k}) = \delta_{jk}\psi^2 + x_j \psi \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_k} + x_k \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j} \psi + x_i^2 \frac {\partial^2 \psi}{\partial x_j \partial x_k}$$ Thus: $$(x_iF(\vec p) - F(\vec p)x_i)\psi$$ $$=  x_i[F(\vec 0)\psi -i\hbar \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_j}\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j} + \hbar^2\frac 12 \sum^3_{k=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial^2 F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_k \partial p_j} \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j} \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_k} + \dots]$$ $$- [F(\vec 0)x_i\psi -i\hbar \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_j}(\delta_{ij}\psi + x_i\frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j}) + \hbar^2\frac 12 \sum^3_{k=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \frac {\partial^2 F(\vec 0)}{\partial p_k \partial p_j} (\delta_{jk}\psi^2 + x_j \psi \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_k} + x_k \frac {\partial \psi}{\partial x_j} \psi + x_i^2 \frac {\partial^2 \psi}{\partial x_j \partial x_k}) + \dots]$$ From here it doesn't look like those higher order terms are all going to cancel out. Complicated FOR loop nesting. Having trouble cleaning up legacy code I am trying to tidy up some really bad legacy code from an old developer and I'm trying to get rid of these nested for loops. The code below shows what I'm currently working with. I've fixed this before with nested SOQL queries but nothing like this. How would this need to look to remove these for loops (except Trigger.New)? Would I use Maps? How would I do that?  map&lt;Id,SObject&gt; mapProperyIdBudDetail = util.GetObjFields(setPropertyId, 'Property'); map&lt;Id,SObject&gt; mapSpaceIdBudDetail = util.GetObjFields( PropertyMap.keyset(), 'Space');  for ( Lease__c l: Trigger.New ) {      if(mapProperyIdBudDetail.get(PropertyMap.get(l.space__c))!=null) {          lProperties = new List&lt;SObject&gt;{mapProperyIdBudDetail.get(PropertyMap.get(l.space__c))};              for ( SObject p: lProperties ) {                  for ( String fm: FieldMap.keyset() ) {                      if ( p.get(FieldMap.get(fm)) != Null) {                         l.put(fm,p.get(FieldMap.get(fm)));                     }                  }             }     } } I understand that the vibration modes of an elementary string determines the identity of its particle. When I first heard this, I visualized a stiff circular steel band-like entity vibrating with 2, 3, 4, 5,... nodes or antinodes, the number determining the particle. This was further supported when I asked a well-known physicist how one gets from equations to physical strings, and he said he recognized the harmonic nature of the solutions.  Bu then I noticed that physicists seem to accept the image of a soft spaghetti-like string flopping about with no well-defined vibrational modes. I asked another physicist about this, and his answer was simply that a string has multiple modes, not necessarily in a harmonic progression.  So my questions are 1) How do you visualize the vibrations of a string, and 2) how are they related to particle identity? What's the starting wealth for higher levels? Custom Post Type Archives by Year & Month? How do you display the archives of a Custom Post Type by Year &amp; Month? $$\lim_{x \to 0} \frac{f(x)}{|x|}=1$$ Then prove that $f$ is not differentiable at $0$. I was given this assignment and I'm not sure about my proof.. it feels like I'm assuming too much and not explaining with enough detail. Is there anything I need to add to make it sufficient? Assume toward contradiction that $f$ is differentiable at $0$. Then by definition we know that $f$ is continuous at $0$. Therefore $\lim _{x\to 0}f\left(x\right)=f\left(0\right)$ We know that $\lim _{x\to 0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{\left|x\right|}=1$ Therefore we can conclude $\lim _{x\to 0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{\left|x\right|}\cdot \left|x\right|=1\cdot 0=0$ But we can also rewrite this as $\lim _{x\to 0}\left(f\left(x\right)\right)\cdot \frac{\left|x\right|}{\left|x\right|}=f\left(0\right)\cdot 1=0$ Therefore $f(0) = 0$. Since $f$ is differentiable at $0$ we have $\lim _{x\to 0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)-f\left(0\right)\right)}{x-0}=\lim _{x\to 0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)-0\right)}{x}=\lim \:_{x\to \:0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{x}\cdot \frac{\left|x\right|}{\left|x\right|}=\lim \:\:_{x\to 0}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{\left|x\right|}\cdot \:\frac{\left|x\right|}{x}$ Since the one sided limits of $\frac{f\left(x\right)}{\left|x\right|}$ exist, and are both equal to 1, we have $\lim \:_{x\to 0^+}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{\left|x\right|}\cdot \:\:\frac{\left|x\right|}{x}=\lim \:_{x\to \:0^+}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{x}\cdot \:\:\:\frac{x}{x}=1\cdot 1=1$ $\lim \:_{x\to 0^-}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{\left|x\right|}\cdot \:\:\frac{\left|x\right|}{x}=\lim \:_{x\to \:0^-}\frac{\left(f\left(x\right)\right)}{-x}\cdot \:\:\:\frac{-x}{x}=1\cdot -1=-1$ Since the limit doesn't exist, we have a contradiction to the fact $f$ is differentiable at $0$. Therefore $f$ is not differentiable at 0. Mathoverflow - why so different Curious why  (se site) doesn't have hot questions list on the right.  It also uses the old stackoverflow design.  Why has this site's design and functionality been abandoned (or at least look abandoned?) How to create script with auto-complete? When I use program like svn and I type in Gnome Terminal:  svn upd   and hit Tab it's autocompleted to:  svn update   Is it possible to do something like that in my custom bash script? Equivalence of definitions of prime ideal in commutative ring How do keyboard input and text output work? Prove that for all integers $ a $ and $ b $, if $ a $ divides $ b $, then $ a^{2} $ divides $ b^{2} $. The question Is there any way to automatically scale and put an entire document on an A0 page? The thesis for which this is to be done is available as LaTeX code, as well as PDF output. Of course I know it is possible to do this manually, but I would prefer a LaTeX solution.  A small background Our university introduced a new page limit for master theses. This is not exactly appreciated by the teaching staff as well as students. To make a little joke, we decided to try to arrange an entire thesis (of approximately 200 pages) on a A0 poster, put it up in the hallway, and put a magnification glass next to it with a note saying: &quot;New page limit introduced: 1 page maximum for all upcoming theses!&quot;  The final result As some of you asked for this: below you can see a picture of the final result. (I &quot;professionally removed&quot; some of the sensitiv information.) We presented the poster during my final presentation and everyone liked it a lot! Now, it is on display next to my office and is still attracting some attention once in a while. Let $M=\big( \begin{smallmatrix} A & B \\ C & D \end{smallmatrix} \big)$. Prove $\det(M)=\det(A)\cdot \det(D-C·A^{-1}·B)$. Let  (shown in matrix blocks) $M=\big( \begin{smallmatrix} A &amp; B \\ C &amp; D \end{smallmatrix} \big)$ a square matrix such that $A$ is invertible and $D$ is a square matrix. I have to prove that  $$\det(M)=\det(A)\cdot \det(D-C·A^{-1}·B)$$  I also have an indication to use it: Consider previously these cases: \begin{align*} A_1 &amp;= \begin{pmatrix} A &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; I \end{pmatrix},\\ A_2 &amp;= \begin{pmatrix} I &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; D \end{pmatrix},\\ A_3 &amp;= A_1·A_2,\\ A_4 &amp;= \begin{pmatrix} I &amp; A^{-1}·B \\ 0 &amp; I \end{pmatrix},\text{ and}\\ A_5 &amp;= A_3\cdot A_4. \end{align*}   The problem is difficult in general for me and I don't even know how to use the indication. How can I make something that looks like this?  --------   Text   ---------  where the horizontal rules extend to the margin on either side?