Sorry my bad English ı append new data using ajax like this  &lt;span class="commentbuton" id="143"&gt;Comment..&lt;/span&gt;   and javascript is   $(function(){     $(".commentbuton").click(function() { ...   but its not working on new appended data please help thanks.
I have a bit of code where I am looping through all the select boxes on a page and binding a .hover event to them to do a bit of twiddling with their width on mouse on/off.  This happens on page ready and works just fine.  The problem I have is that any select boxes I add via Ajax or DOM after the initial loop won't have the event bound.  I have found this plugin (), but before I add another 5k to my pages with a plugin, I want to see if anyone knows a way to do this, either with jQuery directly or by another option.
What is the acceptable similarity in a mathematics PhD dissertation when checking by Turnitin? I have checked the originality of my PhD thesis in mathematics using . The similarity was 31%. Is this percentage acceptable by most committees? I see that the code in many packages and examples contains percent signs % at the end of (many) lines. What are they used for? Do they affect the parsing of those lines? How can I press "Insert" on a keyboard without that key? Find the sum of angles without trigonometry? How do I add newlines between lines printed on the command line? Mail logs are incredibly difficult to read. How could I output a blank line between each line printed on the command line? For example, say I'm grep-ing the log. That way, multiple wrapped lines aren't being confused. Let $G$ be an abelian group of order n.   Let $\mathbb{C}^*$ be the multiplicative group of non-zero complex numbers, and suppose $f:G \rightarrow \mathbb{C}^*$ is a homomorphism. Prove that $\sum_{g \in G} f(g) = 0$ or $\sum_{g \in G} f(g) = n$.  I can prove this for cyclic groups but am unable to generalise to all abelian groups. Can a werewolf turn a muggle into another werewolf? Proving $\arg(zw)=\arg(z)+\arg(w)$ This is my attempt I know this is incomplete or may even be wrong.   Let $θ_1 \in \arg(z)$ and $θ_2 \in \arg(w)$. Then, $θ_1+θ_2 \in \arg(z)+\arg(w)$. Also, $θ_1+θ_2 \in \arg(zw)$. Is this sufficient for the proof or correct at all? Hope someone could help me out. Thanks.   EDIT: Just to avoid any confusions I will add how $\arg z$ is defined.   $\arg z=\{\text{Arg}\, z+2\pi k\mid k\text{ is an integer}\}$ Generating random integer from a range How can I tell what year my bike was made? This is a canonical question that will hopefully encompass all of the questions we get asking us to determine what year a bicycle was manufactured (how old is my bike, how old is my frame, etc.). Each "answer" should address a different way to determine the manufacturing year of a bicycle. To some extent, these will also help you narrow down the model as well as it will tell you what distinguishing features to look at.  The span of answers would include things such as:      Skiptooth cranks Cartridge bottom brackets (BB30/90 etc) Elliptical chainring Quick releases versus contemporary through-axles How the steerer attaches to the fork (quill vs. threadless)  Braking system (especially with mountain bikes: v-brake, direct pull, etc.)   Shifting ramps and pins on cassettes/sprockets and chainrings (versus flat sprockets) Frame material (e.g., shift from tubular steel to use of CF and hydroformed aluminium)  Frame tubing type (e.g. Reynolds 531 tubing introduced around 1934, still used today; Reynolds 501 tubing introduced around 1983). So a frame with an original 501 decal can't be from the 70', 531 decal doesn't help as much because of the range of years produced. Also, see Decals.   *Decals: style/design, amount, placement, color, etc. can help not only determine models, but also year of manufacture. Many changed decal design for the same model bike often yearly, with special/limited editions even more specific. This applies only if decals are original or have been replaced with the identical design. Tubing decals (Reynolds, Columbus, etc.) also changed designs for same tubing made in different years, although the changes aren't made as often, and manufacturers didn't always put tubing Brand decals on every model. Earlier bikes tended to have less fancy, less colorful, less quantity of decals.   Headbadges: most early bikes had actual "badges", often quite detailed and fancy, made of metal, then plastic, and finally just using decals on the headtube. Most bikes lost their metal badges in the 60's and early 70's, although some brands still have actual badges to this day, but in general a real badge indicates an earlier model bike. Dropout style (including the later inclusion of lawyers lips) Presence or absence of CPSC reflectors (USA only) Manufacturing method (shift from lugs to TIG welding, for example)  Number of gears (shift from 2x5 ten-speed to 3x8, 2x9, 1x11, etc.)  Inspection of lug design: pantographs, cut-out, stampings, custom brazing/filing, chrome, fork crow n sweep, etc. Frame/Fork Braze-ons. Race bikes tended have less braze-ons the earlier the year of manufacture. Most 60's racers and earlier had few or none with cable guides/stops, shifters, bidons, etc. being clamp-on. By the 80's if it was clamp-on, it was a sign of very cheap models and most frames had braze-ons for all cables, with multiple bottle and accessory bosses depending on style and use.   and so forth. Please edit this question if you have an answer that isn't in the index above.   A couple of caveats:   A previous owner could have replaced or upgraded components on a bicycle, so this guide only applies to original equipment There is a delay between the introduction of a technology (such as indexed shifting) and when manufacturers start selling products that use it. Low-end manufacturers may continue using technology that is severely outdated (such as one-piece cranks, freewheels, or quill stems) because it is cheaper to do so. A number of bikes are built in a Retro style, but with modern components.  Dutch bikes, trendy coffee cruisers, and beach cruisers may be modern but appear to be 1950s styling.  These tend to have modern rims and brakes as a giveaway.     Note that bicycles.stackexchange does not do valuations of bicycles. How much your bicycle is worth depends on the location of the buyer and seller, how much the buyer wants the bike, etc. etc. etc. Show that any bounded linear functional on a normed linear space is continuous.   Can we say that it is uniformly continuous ?   Also, is it true, if we reverse the statement    any continuous  linear functional on a normed linear space is bounded ?? Defining scalable "white curly brackets" {| and |} (⦃ and ⦄) I would like to construct what Unicode calls "white curly brackets" that are in addition scalable. They look like ⦃ (≈{|) and ⦄ (≈|}) and have Unicode codepoints U+2983 and U+2984.  unicode-math has them as \lBrace and \rBrace, but (1) I don't presently use XeTeX or LuaTeX and (2) their design (shown in  on pages 3-4) is not to my liking: the brace part is too fat for my taste, and I would like the vertical bar to not leave any protrusions. I am trying to have them visually match the parentheses \llparenthesis, \rrparenthesis, \llbracket, and \rrbracket from stmaryrd.  Right now I am using a makeshift definition, which is sufficient for now, but the symbols don't scale (in general or with \left/\right). Here is sample code:  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage[only,llbracket,rrbracket,llparenthesis,rrparenthesis]{stmaryrd} % for comparison with 4 similar parenthesis symbols \usepackage{accsupp} % for ensuring the right Unicode codepoint upon pasting  \newcommand*{\llbrace}{%   \BeginAccSupp{method=hex,unicode,ActualText=2983}%     \textnormal{\usefont{OMS}{lmr}{m}{n}\char102}%     \mathchoice{\mkern-4.05mu}{\mkern-4.05mu}{\mkern-4.3mu}{\mkern-4.8mu}%     \textnormal{\usefont{OMS}{lmr}{m}{n}\char106}%   \EndAccSupp{}% } \newcommand*{\rrbrace}{%   \BeginAccSupp{method=hex,unicode,ActualText=2984}%     \textnormal{\usefont{OMS}{lmr}{m}{n}\char106}%     \mathchoice{\mkern-4.05mu}{\mkern-4.05mu}{\mkern-4.3mu}{\mkern-4.8mu}%     \textnormal{\usefont{OMS}{lmr}{m}{n}\char103}%   \EndAccSupp{}% }   \begin{document}  \noindent ok: \(\displaystyle\llbrace abc \rrbrace\) \(\textstyle\llbrace abc \rrbrace\) \(\scriptstyle\llbrace abc \rrbrace\) \(\scriptscriptstyle\llbrace abc \rrbrace\)  \noindent ok: \(\displaystyle \llbrace \frac{a}{b} \rrbrace\) \(\textstyle\llbrace \frac{a}{b} \rrbrace\) \(\scriptstyle\llbrace \frac{a}{b} \rrbrace\) \(\scriptscriptstyle\llbrace \frac{a}{b} \rrbrace\)  \noindent incorrectly scaled (\verb|\scriptsize|): {\scriptsize\(\llbrace abc \rrbrace\)} (large magnification required)  \noindent incorrectly scaled (\verb|\tiny|): {\tiny\(\llbrace abc \rrbrace\)}  \noindent \verb|\left| and \verb|\right| not possible before \verb|\llbrace| and \verb|\rrbrace|: \\ \indent \(\llbrace \left\llbracket\left\{\left[(a) \cdot bc^{2^3}\right]^4\right\}^5\right\rrbracket \rrbrace\) % Note: This is also not possible with \llparenthesis and \rrparenthesis from stmaryrd.  \noindent for comparison: \(\llparenthesis x \rrparenthesis, \llbracket x \rrbracket, \llbrace x \rrbrace; (x), [x], \{x\}\)  \end{document}   Lines 1 and 2 look just right with the present setup. Lines 3 and 4 demonstrate that my definitions don't scale. Lines 5a/b gives an example of where I would like to be able to use \left and \right. Line 6 juxtaposes different types of parentheses for visual comparison.  Is there an easy way to scale the glyphs I have constructed myself? Or is designing new glyphs the only way? While the vertical part of my glyphs doesn't leave any protrusions, the "brace part being too fat" part of my problem isn't being addressed by my code. With this in mind: I recognize that it might not be that easy to make the brace part of the glyph thinner (though if you can, more power to you), but I think that any solution that addresses the scaling problem for any manually constructed glyph cluster will be a valuable contribution to the community.    For a slightly different setup (original example code) with  \RequirePackage{fix-cm} \documentclass[12pt]{memoir} \usepackage{fixltx2e}[2006/09/13] \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{txfonts} \usepackage[only,llbracket,rrbracket,llparenthesis,rrparenthesis]{stmaryrd} \usepackage{accsupp}   in the preamble, one needs \mkern-5.7mu in the fourth argument to \mathchoice for "correct" scaling. To see what goes wrong in that case, it's best to include a line such as discontinuous small symbols in a footnote\footnote{\(\scriptscriptstyle\llbrace \frac{a}{b} \rrbrace\)}. This might help a potential answerer test things out. What are the options for traveling to the airports in Paris? I’m using tikz-cd for diagrams, and have a medium-sized diagram that I want to re-use several times.  However, when I try using a definition like:  \newcommand{\myarrow}{$\begin{tikzcd} A \ar{r} &amp; B \end{tikzcd}$   I get an error:  ERROR: Package pgfbasematrix Error: Single ampersand used with wrong catcode.   Is it possible to put a tikz-cd diagram into a defined command somehow? How can I make something that looks like this?  --------   Text   ---------  where the horizontal rules extend to the margin on either side? How to fix a stripped pedal crank The threads on my bike's pedal crank just became fully stripped and the pedal fell off, though the pedal itself is fine. Is there any way I can fix this without fully replacing the pedal crank? Java reading a file into an ArrayList? Clearing Recently used coordinate reference systems using QGIS? After using some non usual SRC for demonstration purpose, I wish to clear my  "Recently used coordinate reference systems" list for the sake of praticity.  Is it possible?   I am using QGIS 2.10.1. Let $G$ be a finite abelian group, then $G$ has a subgroup of order $n$ if and only if $n\mid G$.  Proof: by Lagrange if $H\leq G$ then $|H|$ divides $|G|$ so this proves one of the implications.  We prove the other implication by strong induction on the order of $G$, for primes this is just Cauchy, so we can take these like base cases. Now let $n$ be a proper divisor of $|G|$, take $p$ a prime in the factorization of $|G|$ (instead of $|G|$ is should be $n$, I had made a mistake when typing the first time), then by cauchy there is an element $x$ of $G$ of order $p$, since $G$ is abelian $\langle x\rangle$ is normal in $G$ so we can look at the quotient group $G/\langle x\rangle$, this group has order $\frac{|G|}{p}$, now take a prime $p_1$ in the factorization of $\frac{|G|}{n}$. By induction the quotient group has a subgroup $E$ of order $G/pp_1$ now look at the preimage of $E$ under the natural homomorphism from $G$ to $G/\langle x\rangle$, it is easy to see this is a subgroup of $G$, we call it $I$, consider the restriction of the natural projection to $I$, this is a surjective homomorphism from $I$ to $E$ with kernel $\langle x\rangle$ so by the first isomorphism theorem $I/x\cong E$ so $\frac{|I|}{|\langle  x\rangle|}=|E|\implies  |I|=\frac{|G|}{pp_1}{p}=\frac{|G|}{p_1}$ Notice $\frac{|G|}{p_1}$ is a multiple of $n$ since $p_1$ was in the fatorization of $\frac{|G|}{n}$. So by induction $I$ has a subgroup of order $n$ which is also a subgroup of $G$. bash: alias: alias: not found