Han Solo explains to us that      Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it.    We also know that there are established .  In real life, aircraft must declare flight plans with aviation authorities. This helps prevent mid-air collisions. This doesn't seem to be the case in the Star Wars universe, as ships are always being asked for their intended destination.  Calculating a hyperspace route around planetary bodies is fairly straightforward. They move in a prescribed motion and their position can be calculated accurately.  But we see ships jumping into hyperspace with little prior planning (besides the requisite calculations), and coming out in seemingly random spots.   How do ships traveling through hyperspace avoid collisions with other ships in hyperspace (or real space), and how do they avoid collisions with other ships that may or may not be at their intended destination?
Hyperspace travel is a norm in Star Wars universe. Even small ships have that capability and without this capability galactic-scale economy isn't possible.  My educated estimates say that at any point of time at least billions of ships are in hyperspace across the galaxy. Now, talk about economic hubs like Coruscant during Clone Wars Era. The number of ships arriving here should be enormous. Millions in an hour? If one person small ship can have warping capability, then the number can exceed even billions in a peak hour. You can go shopping on a neighbor planet five times a day or you can live on a cheap planet even if you have a job on Coruscant (there are public transport cabs featured in Rebels TV show in case you aren't rich enough to have own ship).  Now, the famous quote:     "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova, and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"   That's fine. Calculations prevent you from hitting a star, supernova or planet which are already on map, but how does a ship avoid hitting another ship? Provided that number of ships arriving near a planet is that much high, the probability of two ships jumping to the same co-ordinate can't be zero. In fact, the probability should be very very high.  Is there a central body which controls the traffic by coordinating the hyperspace calculations of different ships? This seems unlikely because everyone seems to go anywhere they want while maintaining the destination privacy (there are countless examples). Or, is there really a traffic control body and those who travel privately actually gamble? Is there any other protocol if not traffic control body?  Has the canon ever addressed it? What about Legends?
Ambiguity in Negation: "John did not come because of the rain" What does var prime = num != 1; mean? I am aware that there are plenty of threads on intensifiers(very, rather, pretty, quite, fairly, etc.), both on this site and on the web, because of their ambiguity in terms of meaning. What I have learned is that their meaning can change depending on which country you are from, which context they are used, or your intonation. So instead of comparing all intensifiers, I decided to make my question more specific. I chose to focus on the word pretty because of its "common" usage.  So as we can see, the word pretty has two meanings and unfortunately they are "pretty" opposite. My question is can you tell me, just by taking into account  the example sentences below, in which sentences "pretty" means "fairly,", and in which it means "very?"  Does "Tom looks pretty tired" always mean "Tom looks a little/fairly tired" ? Intersection of kernels and linear dependence of functionals Laplace transform of integral constant The difference between an analogy and a metaphor? Many a time I've asked what the difference is between an analogy and a metaphor. I've asked it to my teacher, on internet sites, to my parents, so on and so forth. I got a different answer every time, and I never fully grasped what the difference is, so what is the difference? Following are other questions which I think I need to know:   From a non X Session? (meaning root isn't logged into X) If multiple people were logged in on X, could I auto-detect who was on which screen, and thus programmatically detect which screen I need to launch the app on? Can I launch the app as the user? ( ok I'm 99.999% sure this is a yes ) Can I detect if users of group X are logged in to X? I have a Red Hat Enterprise Linux server (7.5 x86_64). I have OpenSSH version 7.4. I was asked to upgrade it to a later version for security reasons: Nessus states that . However the Red Hat software and downloads does not have the latest package RPM.  I found some clues on where to get the latest package for OpenSSH. I found , however, I do not know on how to upgrade it and trust this website. I do not want the SSH and other configuration to be modified by the ugrade.  I did find links but however they are not useful, for example .  I would like to know how to upgrade OpenSSH without using yum. G-test vs Pearson's chi-squared test Finding $ \int^1_0 \frac{\ln(1+x)}{x}dx$ There is supposed to be a clean solution to the integral below, maybe involving some symmetry $$ \int^1_0 \frac{\ln(1+x)}{x}dx$$ I have tried integration by parts as followed: $\ln(x+1)=u$ ,$\frac{1}{x+1} dx = du$ and also $\frac{1}{x}dx=dv$, $\ln(x)=v$. Then, the integral becomes $$\int^1_0 \frac{\ln(1+x)}{x}dx=- \int^1_0 \frac{\ln x}{1+x}dx$$ which does not make this easier. I have also tried using the identity $\int_a^bf(x)~dx=\int_a^bf(a+b-x)~dx$. So let $I = \int^1_0 \frac{\ln(1+x)}{x}dx$ and also $I = \int^1_0 \frac{\ln(2-x)}{1-x}  $. Then $$2I= \int^1_0 \ln(1+x)+\ln(2-x)$$ which is not any easier, either. Any ideas? :) What exactly is a photon? Access personal views in a list with PowerShell I am trying to first access and then edit Personal Views for a SharePoint List using PowerShell. However only the public views are returned. In the example below the list called List1 has two views - 1 public and 1 personal created by a regular user account (contoso\user1).  I run the script below via an admin account (contoso\spadmin) -  $url= "http://portal.contoso.com/sites/TEST" $web = Get-SPWeb $url $list = $web.Lists["List1"] Write-Output "Count = $($list.views.count)" $list.views| % {Write-Output "Title = $($_.title)"}   Result -  Count = 1 Title = All Items   I tried the following as well but that did not return the personal views.   [Microsoft.SharePoint.SPSecurity]::RunWithElevatedPrivileges( {      $web = Get-SPWeb $url     $list = $web.Lists["List1"]     Write-Host "Count = $($list.views.count)"     $list.views| % {Write-Host "Title = $($_.title)"} } )    How do I access the personal views for a list with PowerShell? why normalize and the definition of directional derivative I'm not understanding how to solve this problem.  I think the problem lies in the fact that I don't understand why normalize and the definition of directional derivative... It's in Portuguese. The question would be: Determine the directional derivative of f in P in direction of vector u: I am currently developing a website which is going to take some time to finish. I need to move some 'stuff' to production frequently, while maintaining a under construction status. My front page will clearly mention that my website is under construction.  I know crawlers will access my URL before I am ready to go live. Should I tell them my site is under construction (no need to index)? If yes how?  P.S.: Eventually, I am ok to let them see my under construction front page. SSH login without password with kerberos Searching through ODT documents without opening them? Let's say I have 2000 .ODT files. Their names are random numbers. How do I go about searching for, let's say, "pricing list"? How do I find the document I need without opening all of them one by one and checking to see if it's the right one?  Is there some program to search through the words in the documents without opening them? What is a field, really? There was a reason why I constantly failed physics at school and university, and that reason was, apart from the fact I was immensely lazy, that I mentally refused to &quot;believe&quot; more advanced stuff until I understand the fundamentals (which I, eventually, never did). As such, one of the most fundamental things in physics that I still don't understand (a year after dropping out from the university) is the concept of . No one cared to explain what a field actually is, they just used to throw in a bunch of formulas and everyone was content. The school textbook definition for a field (electromagnetic in this particular case, but they were similar), as I remember it, goes like:  An electromagnetic field is a special kind of substance by which charged moving particles or physical bodies with a magnetic moment interact.  A special kind of substance, are they for real? This sounds like the authors themselves didn't quite understand what a field is so they decided to throw in a bunch of buzzwords to make it sounds right. I'm fine with the second half but a special kind of substance really bugs me, so I'd like to focus on that. Is a field material? Apparently, it isn't. It doesn't consist of particles like my laptop or even the light. If it isn't material, is it real or is it just a concept that helps to explain our observations? While this is prone to speculations, I think we can agree that in scope of this discussion particles actually do exist and laws of physics don't (the latter are nothing but human ideas so I suspect Universe doesn't &quot;know&quot; a thing about them, at least if we're talking raw matter and don't take it on metalevel where human knowledge, being a part of the Universe, makes the Universe contain laws of physics). Any laws are only a product of human thinking while the stars are likely to exist without us homo sapiens messing around. Or am I wrong here too? I hope you already see why I hate physics. Is a field not material but still real? Can something &quot;not touchable&quot; by definition be considered part of our Universe by physicists? I used to imagine that a &quot;snapshot&quot; of our Universe in time would contain information about each particle and its position, and this would've been enough to &quot;de&quot; it but I guess my programmer metaphors are largely off the track. (Oh, and I know that the uncertainty principle makes such (de)serialization impossible — I only mean that I thought the Universe can be &quot;defined&quot; as the set of all material objects in it). Is such assumption false? At this point, if fields indeed are not material but are part of the Universe, I don't really see how they are different from  except for perhaps a more geeky flavor. When I talked about this with the teacher who helped me to prepare for the exams (which I did pass, by the way, it was before I dropped out), she said to me that, if I wanted hardcore definitions,  a field is a function that returns a value for a point in space.  Now this finally makes a hell lot of sense to me but I still don't understand how mathematical functions can be a part of the Universe and shape the reality. How do I verify a PGP signature? What GUI (no command line) software or websites can I use to verify a PGP signature?  If I have a message like this  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1  Because anyone can claim to be me. There's no validation of the user name or email address when someone posts a comment. While I do try to remove imposters, some may slip through. By signing my comments using this technique, anyone can independently verify that I was the author of the message by validating the signature. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)  iD8DBQFFxqRFCMEe9B/8oqERAqA2AJ91Tx4RziVzY4eR4Ms4MFsKAMqOoQCgg7y6 e5AJIRuLUIUikjNWQIW63QE= =aAhr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----   How can I verify the message against the public key to get the same signature back?  This  does not allow me to do that. After the upgrade I can't figure out how the new shield system works. I have the option to discard the shield, and I notice I have a new potion in the inventory.  More importantly, I got attacked (and lost) twice in a short amount of time and don't have a shield. When do you now get shield? Install on, install in, install to When I say "programs to install on a new PC" it sounds alright to me, but I'm not sure if it's the correct usage. Which one of the following should I use?   Programs to install on a new PC Programs to install in a new PC Programs to install to a new PC