Can anyone tell me the difference between      Here We Are   And     We Are Here
Here comes Bob.  Bob is coming here.  Would anyone please explain what is  the difference between these?
This is probably a silly question but I need some help. I opened a file that I've been working on for about a month in the new 2.8 version of Blender. However when I tried to reopen the file in version 2.79, the scene is completely empty. Here is where the problem lies for me, I accidentally saved over the original file save while in version 2.8 . Please help. Thanks! Injection from $\mathbb{N}\to\{0,1\}$ to the set of all monotonic decreasing functions from $\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{Z}$ Edge won't connect to internet, Skype for business won't screen-share, Windows Store won't update apps after Windows 10 version 1809 installed $f(z)$ and $\overline{f(\overline{z})}$ simultaneously holomorphic Prove that the functions $f(z)$ and $\overline{f(\overline{z})}$ are simultaneously holomorphic.   I take this to mean that $f(z)$ is holomorphic if and only if $\overline{f(\overline{z})}$ is holomorphic.  Let $g(z)=\overline{f(\overline{z})}$. Note that $\overline{g(\overline{z})}=f(z)$. So it suffices to prove that if $f(z)$ is holomorphic, then $g(z)$ is holomorphic.  Write $f(z)=u(z)+iv(z)$. Since $f(z)$ is holomorphic, the real and imaginary parts satisfy the Cauchy-Riemann equations:  $$\frac{\partial{u(z)}}{\partial{x}} = \frac{\partial{v(z)}}{\partial{y}}, \frac{\partial{u(z)}}{\partial{y}} = -\frac{\partial{v(z)}}{\partial{x}}.$$  We have $g(z) = u(\overline{z})+i(-v(\overline{z}))$. To prove that $g(z)$ is holomorphic, we must prove that its real and imaginary parts satisfy the Cauchy-Riemann equations:  $$\frac{\partial{u(\overline{z})}}{\partial{x}} = \frac{\partial{(-v(\overline{z}))}}{\partial{y}}, \frac{\partial{u(\overline{z})}}{\partial{y}} = -\frac{\partial{(-v(\overline{z}))}}{\partial{x}}.$$  How can we obtain this from the above relations? Why has my database connection failed? $ \int_1^2\int_1^2 \int_1^2 \int_1^2 \frac{x_1+x_2+x_3-x_4}{x_1+x_2+x_3+x_4}dx_1dx_2dx_3dx_4 $ Strange noise when moving files When I move files, a small 'noise' noise comes through my headphones or speakers.  It only happens when moving files.  Is there a reason why moving files causes this slight static?  It only lasts for as long as the files are moving.  I'm not as much as annoyed as I am curious.  It is a Gigabyte board with a integrated sound card.  I'm running Windows 7.  I don't think it used to do this but I'm not quite sure. subsurf splits the mirrored model into two objects I tried to subsurf this model that I mirrored but when I use subsurf it splits the model into two objects.  Before Subsurf:   After Subsurf:   Any help would be appreciated. Pagination not working with custom loop I've got a custom loop that I'm using to display some Real Estate listings that will be available within 60 days. I'm calling it with the following function:   &lt;?php  $sixtydays = date('Y/m/d', strtotime('+60 days')); $paged = (get_query_var('paged')) ? get_query_var('paged') : 1; $query = new PostsOrderedByMetaQuery(array(   'post_type' =&gt; array('post', 'real-estate'),   'meta_key' =&gt; 'Time Available',   'meta_compare' =&gt; '&lt;=',   'meta_value' =&gt; $sixtydays,   'paged' =&gt; $paged,   'orderby_meta_key' =&gt; 'Price',   'orderby_order'    =&gt; 'ASC' )); ?&gt; &lt;?php while ($query-&gt;have_posts()) : $query-&gt;the_post(); ?&gt;   While the loop works great, I can't get it to paginate. It shows the first 10 (my default) posts but doesn't show the pagination. The only way to display all posts is to show them on one page by adding 'posts_per_page' =&gt; -1, I have similar loops on other pages that have no problem paginating. The only difference with this one is that there are two meta keys that are filtering the posts.   I'm using WP Page Navi for this and the rest of my pages. I'm closing the loop and adding the pagination using the following code:   &lt;?php endwhile; // End the loop. Whew. ?&gt; &lt;?php wp_pagenavi(); ?&gt; &lt;?php wp_reset_query(); ?&gt;   How can I go about fixing this? Restore Macintosh HD to its original partition configuration I have read answers to questions like  but I couldn't find a general rule for using "you" or "yourself", "him" or "himself" that could explain things I see in some examples.  For example, I think that one normally say (according to examples I see in ):   You bring something with you. You have something in you. You have something on you. You pressed her to you.   But on the other hand one would say:   You draw attention to yourself. He killed himself. You can try it out for yourself.   As a general rule, it seems that the reflexive pronoun is used when the object is the same as the subject of the verb. But for prepositional phrases, it seems more complicated. Do some prepositions (like "with", "in", "on") always come with the accusative form of the pronoun, and some other (like "for") don't? What about "to", that seems to be followed by both in different circumstances? Distant aliens receive signal with instructions on how to construct humans, long after Earth is extinct I've seen the phrase "sh compatible" used usually in reference to shells. I'm not sure if it also applies to the programs that might be run from within shells.  What does it mean for a shell or other program to be "sh compatible"? What would it mean to be "sh incompatible"?  Edit: This question asking the difference between bash and sh is very relevant:   I'd still like a direct answer to what it means to be "sh compatible". A reasonable expectation might be that "sh compatible" means "implements the Shell Command Language" but then why are there so many "sh compatible" shells and why are they different? Identify a book with a social engineering theme I originally read this book in the mid- to late '70s.   The premise was a bureaucracy whose job it was to manipulate events in human history by making the smallest possible change that would effect the desired outcome. Not time cops in the sense of going after law breakers.  The intent was to maintain a policy of non-interference as much as possible but when interference was warranted then to make the least possible change and to do so invisibly.  For example, they might take someone's keys off the dresser and put them just out of sight underneath the dresser where they plausibly might have fallen.  The subject would never know of the manipulation but would then be delayed getting out of the house and the ripples grew from there to avert a war or otherwise affect events on a large scale.  After reading that, whenever I would lose something - especially in an improbable way such as dropping a screw at my feet and then finding it on the other side of the room half an hour later - I would take some consolation in the thought that I had just averted some global catastrophe.  I was pretty scatterbrained as a kid (we call that ADHD nowadays) so I experienced this a lot.  Given that I've spent so much time pondering the ideas from the book, I'd love to re-read it. Should a math paper use non-alphabetical ordering of authors' names for unequal contributions? Using alphabetical ordering for authors' names is a long established tradition in mathematics. In the situations of extremely unequal contributions, is it reasonable to break from this tradition?  Has there been any examples?  If it is common, what is the threshold for breaking from alphabetical ordering? I'd like to have a python program alert me when it has completed its task by making a beep noise.  Currently,  I use import os and then use a command line speech program to say &quot;Process complete&quot;.  I much rather it be a simple &quot;bell.&quot; I know that there's a function that can be used in Cocoa apps, NSBeep, but I don't think that has much anything to do with this. I've also tried print(\a)  but that didn't work. I'm using a Mac, if you couldn't tell by my Cocoa comment, so that may help. Implications of parity violation for molecular biology In biology, the concept of parity emerges in the context of chiral molecules, where two molecules exist with the same structure but opposite parity. Interestingly, one enantiomer often strongly predominates over the other in natural biological systems (e.g. D-glucose is ubiquitous, L-glucose is rare in nature).  In physics, it has been established that weak interactions violate parity, which (if I understand correctly) implies a physical difference between left- and right-handed systems.  This suggests to me the following questions: Does parity violation in physics affect the physical or chemical properties of chiral molecules? And does this have any implications for our understanding of biological homochirality? How to lead a moving target from a moving shooter I saw this question: .  My situation is a little different though.   My target moves, and the shooter moves.  Also, the shooter's velocity is added to the bullets' velocities, i.e. bullets fired while sliding to the right will have a greater velocity toward the right.   What I'm trying to do is to get the enemy to be able to determine where they need to shoot in order to hit the player.  Using the linked SO solution, unless the player and enemy are stationary, the velocity difference will cause a miss.  How can I prevent that?      Here is the solution presented from the stack overflow answer.  It boils down to solving a quadratic equation of the form:  a * sqr(x) + b * x + c == 0   Note that by sqr I mean square, as opposed to square root. Use the following values:  a := sqr(target.velocityX) + sqr(target.velocityY) - sqr(projectile_speed) b := 2 * (target.velocityX * (target.startX - cannon.X)       + target.velocityY * (target.startY - cannon.Y)) c := sqr(target.startX - cannon.X) + sqr(target.startY - cannon.Y)   Now we can look at the discriminant to determine if we have a possible solution.  disc := sqr(b) - 4 * a * c   If the discriminant is less than 0, forget about hitting your target -- your projectile can never get there in time. Otherwise, look at two candidate solutions:  t1 := (-b + sqrt(disc)) / (2 * a) t2 := (-b - sqrt(disc)) / (2 * a)   Note that if disc == 0 then t1 and t2 are equal. When functions commute under composition Today I was thinking about composition of functions.  It has nice properties, its always associative, there is an identity, and if we restrict to bijective functions then we have an inverse.  But then I thought about commutativity.  My first intuition was that bijective self maps of a space should commute but then I saw some counter-examples. The symmetric group is only abelian if $n \le 2$ so clearly there need to be more restrictions on functions than bijectivity for them to commute.  The only examples I could think of were boring things like multiplying by a constant or maximal tori of groups like $O(n)$ (maybe less boring).  My question: In a euclidean space, what are (edit) some nice characterizations of sets of functions that commute? What about in a more general space?   Bonus: Is this notion of commutativity important anywhere in analysis? Why did a Dementor try to take Harry's soul in the train? In "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" - when Harry and his friends were travelling to Hogwarts by train, the train stopped in between and Dementors were searching for Sirius Black. Why did one of the Dementors try to take Harry's soul?