I know that the answer to that question is to obtain the Elder Wand, but I think that approach doesn't really make sense.   We know that death is not necessary for the Elder Wand to change hands (Grindelwald stole it from Gregorovitch, and Albus obtained by beating Grindelwald in a non fatal duel) which means we know Voldemort didn't have to kill Snape to obtain the wand, that was just one way of doing it.   Snape was a powerful wizard(maybe one of the strongest of the death eaters) and had proven himself more useful than almost any Death Eater(providing years of information on Dumbledore and later killing him), Voldemort probably didn't want to kill him unless it was absolutely necessary.   Couldn't there have been some other way to get the wand from Severus? Like challenging Snape to a non-fatal duel for ownership of the wand, or perhaps even giving Severus the wand and then stealing it, Grindelwald style?
made me think about the movie versions of the 7th book.  In Deathly Hallows Part II      Voldemort has Nagini attack Snape because Voldy thinks that Snape has the Elder Wand's allegiance. We know that Snape didn't actually have the allegiance, Draco did (and by then Harry did) and his plan had failed.   But if Voldy's plan had succeeded with Snape, would he have gotten allegiance?      Since voldemort didn't kill Snape, Nagini did...
Why do I get "Required key not available" when install 3rd party kernel modules or after a kernel upgrade? Matrix Multiplication in context of row and column vectors What is a meta for? A guest at my house over the weekend stood puzzled next to my driveway. &quot;What is that for?&quot; she asked, pointing to a framework of 2x4s and hardware cloth perched on an old tire amid piles of sand. &quot;Sifter.&quot; I said. &quot;For what?&quot; &quot;For sifting gravel.&quot; &quot;Why?&quot; &quot;To line walking paths, such as the one you're standing on...&quot; Spend enough time working with something, and it's easy to forget how strange and unnatural your makeshift tooling can appear to those unfamiliar with it.  Such is the nature of these meta sites. For 5 years, we've been directing folks to them for discussion and feedback, to commune with their community, hash out misunderstandings, propose changes and document the current state of things. And... We haven't always been good about helping them get past the initial shock and confusion of dealing with this system. This has manifested in several unfortunate behaviors:  Downvoting of legitimate support questions - those that are not duplicates and reflect an actual bug or honest misunderstanding of how the system operates. Folks who are acting in good faith should be treated as such - , not shutting them down.  Closing questions that seek input and discussion from the community - in hindsight, adding &quot;primarily opinion based&quot; as a close reason on meta sites was... a terrible idea. The old &quot;not constructive&quot; close reason made some sense for rants and so on, but for a discussion site closing down questions that solicit opinions is just silly. Here on MSE, we prefer the following off-topic reason instead:  This question does not appear to seek input and discussion from the community. If you have encountered a problem on one of our sites, please describe it in detail. See also:    The perception that Stack Exchange is disrupting the normal operation of the site by talking about future plans - even when those plans involve the community. I talked about this a bit more on , but seeing this kind of backlash toward folks at the company who were trying to be open and receptive to discussion about what they were doing was kinda disheartening - we need to be doing more of that, not less.  A reluctance to ask questions about asking questions - which is about as meta as you can get, and yet we probably get more of these via email than we see on meta, while being the least-qualified to answer them well.   After an increasing number of complaints from both core users and moderators on a number of sites, we're taking a hard look at how we can improve this situation... Starting with a change to :  Meta is for...  ...$SiteName users to communicate with each other about $SiteName (asking questions about how the websites work, or about policies and community decisions) ...$SiteName  users to communicate with Stack Exchange the company (posting bugs, suggesting improvements, or proposing new features), and ...Stack Exchange to communicate with the community (soliciting feedback on new ideas or features, or discussing policies that affect the whole network)  Lots of topics are fair game, as long as they are about the Stack Exchange family of Q&amp;A sites in some way. Any issue that concerns the core Stack Exchange engine that runs all Stack Exchange websites is welcome here.  This replaces the previous bullet list of specific topics, and aims to outline broad purposes with examples for clarification rather than constraining the scope to those examples. So... that's a start. But a documentation change isn't going to change misconceptions that've already built up among newer users. So I'm asking y'all for help: What do you think meta should be used for, and how can we better communicate this intent to new users? I want to talk to someone about the house that my wife and I own.  Saying, for example, "My wife's and my house is awesome," sounds a bit funny to me.  What's the best way to express this?  Clarification  I'm asking specifically about the grammar of multiple nouns in possessive form.  I'm particularly curious if it's possible to do this with a first-person pronoun (me).  I am capable of rephrasing this in other ways - my question is not how to express the idea, but about this particular grammatical construction, if it is even legal. Evaluate the integral $$\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac{1}{1+\tan^\alpha{x}}\,\mathrm{d}x$$ I'm trying to find the complex roots of $z^3 + \bar{z} = 0$ using De Moivre.  Some suggested multiplying both sides by z first, but that seems wrong to me as it would add a root ( and I wouldn't know which root was the extra ).  I noticed that $z=a+bi$ and there exists $\theta$ such that the trigonometric representation of $z$ is $\left ( \sqrt{a^2+b^2} \right )\left ( \cos \theta + i \sin \theta \right )$ .  It seems that $-\bar{z} = -\left ( \sqrt{a^2+b^2} \right )\left ( \cos (-\theta) + i \sin (-\theta) \right )$  However, my trig is pretty rusty and I'm not quite sure where to go from here. Here is a question that's been bothering me since I was a sophomore in university, and should have probably asked before graduating:  In analytic (Lagrangian) mechanics, the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations from the principle of least action assumes that the start and end coordinates at the initial and final times are known. As a consequence, any variation on the physical path must vanish at its boundaries. This conveniently cancels out the contributions of the boundary terms after integration by parts, and setting the requirement for minimal action, we obtain the E.L. equations.  This is all nice and dandy, but our intention is finding the location of a particle at a time in the future, which we do not know a priori; after we derive any equations of motion for a system, we solve them by applying initial values instead of boundary conditions.   How are these two approaches consistent? In all the Star Wars movies, R2D2 just boops and beeps his way around. And everyone understands him perfectly, though he is obviously not speaking Basic.  How do people understand him - is there like an astromech language? If so, then would one have to learn it, or is it comprised of feelings and emotions (expressed in beeps), essentially making a tonal language?  If I may be permitted to use an example from the prequels without too many lynch mobs forming, Anakin Skywalker converses frequently with Artoo while in the Naboo fighter, but he couldn't have had much schooling at the age of eleven, especially because he was a slave.  So how would people, Anakin especially, be able to understand astromechs? Suppose there are two users that have commented on an answer. Both have the same user name, and I want to reply to one of them. How can I do this?  It appears that, under the current system, there is no way for me to do this. Specifically, from , I see that:     4. Matching is performed in reverse chronological order, so if five people named John are participating, @john will match the most recent John   So, consider this a request to add this feature using an -n suffix or something similar; e.g. @john-2 could be used to reply to the second John from the top.  Update Thanks to  for nice answer of @name(userid) based auto-complete suggestion which has no loophole. It involves no counting from top &amp; has no consequences when a comment is deleted. But, I think @name(userid) should be used directly in comment as all form inputs at SE are text (nothing embedded).  Now, I'm trying to finalize it based on it: The system should allow optional @name(userid) format for reply. Provided userid with this format, system should ignore name. And, in the situation of duplicate name based confusion, system should demand this format as mandatory to submit comment.  How to get userid? In case of duplicate name based confusion, system should append (userid) in hypertext to their profile. It'd work for mobile version too. On full version, for easy fill-up, a hover reply icon would be fine (like hover vote up icon). Upon clicking it, system should fill @name(userid) in comment text box.  From reply reader side: Multiple Johns could be confused even if they didn't come from notification (because nobody remembers his/her own userid). So, highlight the background of comments which are replied to them. Suppose I have a Python function as defined below:  def foo(arg1,arg2):     #do something with args     a = arg1 + arg2     return a   I can get the name of the function using foo.func_name. How can I programmatically get its source code, as I typed above? I want to create a table like this using Latex        ---------------------------------       |               sets            |       ---------------------------------       | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | --------------------------------------- | I1  | * |   | * | * |   | * |   | * | ---------------------------------------   Here is what I wrote  \begin{table} \caption{Multiprogram sets} \label{multiprogram}  \begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c |}   \cline{3-9}   \multicolumn{8}{}{}    &amp;   Sets  \\   \hline   \multicolumn{1}{}{}   &amp; 1 &amp; 2 &amp;  3 &amp; 4 &amp; 5 &amp;  6 &amp; 7  &amp; 8 \\   \hline    astar         &amp;  &amp; * &amp;  &amp; * &amp;  &amp;  &amp; * &amp;   \\   \hline  \end{tabular} \end{table}   But it doesn't work! The output look like            -----------------------------                                  sets | ---------------------------------------         1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | --------------------------------------- | I1  | * |   | * | * |   | * |   | * | ---------------------------------------   Any way to fix that? Initializing Manipulator value within DialogInput (version 10.1 only) I want to design a member login site in WP but I have a doubt that is WordPress can handle more than 40000 users on same database?  I am not sure about this so I am stooping my work here. So please help me if anyone know exactly about this to proceed my project with WP. Does JPA support mapping to sql views? I'm currently using Eclipselink, but I know now days most JPA implementations have been pretty standardized. Is there a native way to map a JPA entity to a view? I am not looking to insert/update, but the question is really how to handle the @Id annotation. Every entity in the JPA world must have an ID field, but many of the views I have created do not conform to this. Is there native support for this in the JPA or do I need to use hacks to get it to work? I've searched a lot and found very little information about doing this. I know about beamer's  feature \setbeamercovered{invisible} and \setbeamercovered{transparent} to hide or grey out upcoming item's . But is there some way to have past items greyed (transparent) and future items hidden (invisible), so that only the current item is black/highlighted? And the best would be if on or 1 slide after the last all the item's could be visible highlighted. Something like this:   [grey] past 1 [grey] past 2 current [hidden] future 1 [hidden] future 2 [hidden] future 3   Is there any easy way of doing this? Show that the integral of a positive function is positive In the 70's I had a stack of old Amateur Radio magazines (50s-60s), and for a long time I saved an article about using the  to combine a number of resistors to achieve a specific value. Does anyone recall and have a copy of this article, or know how the Euclidean algorithm is applied to solve this problem? Adventurer enters an other-dimensional realm where he repeatedly dies unexpectedly and wakes up in reality Site specific magic comment links Over the weekend Sprint and T-Mobile announced again that they would try to merge.  Assuming the powers that be in the US don't have any issue with this deal and it moves forward as proposed, what does it mean for me as a shareholder?  I have 2,000 Sprint shares, and as part of the deal it looks like one Sprint share will be worth ~10% of a T-Mobile share as of the price on Friday.  So does that mean that, if this goes through in early 2019, my 2,000 Sprint shares would turn into 200 T-Mobile shares? What if the price of Sprint stock goes up from here? What if it craters? Is this price/ratio set in stone?  If my stock does get converted, does that happen automatically? Will Fidelity all of a sudden show that I own TMUS stock instead of S?