Let $F$ be a sub-field of the complex numbers (i.e. a field of characteristic zero). Let $V$ be a finite dimensional vector space over $F$. Suppose that $E_1, E_2, \dots , E_k$ are projection of $V$ and that $E_1 + E_2 + \dots  + E_K = I$. Prove that $E_iE_j = 0$ $\forall$ $i \neq j$.     I have tried this problem for for $n = 2$ as follows:  As $E_1$ and $E_2$ are projection operators,  $E_1^2 = E_1$ and $E_2^2 = E_2$. Also since $E_1 + E_2 = I$, multiplying this relation by $E_1$ we get $$ E_1 (E_1 + E_2) = E_1 I = E_1 \Rightarrow E_1^2 + E_1 E_2 = E_1 \Rightarrow E_1 + E_1E_2 = E_1 \Rightarrow E_1E_2 = 0 $$     But what to do for the general case?
I am reading Introduction to Quantum Computing by Kaye, Laflamme, and Mosca. As an exercise, they write  "Prove that if the operators $P_{i}$ satisfy $P_{i}^{*}=P_{i}$ and $P_{i}^{2}=P_{i}$ , then $P_{i}P_{j}=0$ for $i\ne j$.''   In the context of this problem, it has been assumed that $I=\sum_{i=1}^{n} P_{i}$, where I suppose that $n$ could be infinite. I have shown that this is true in the trivial case $n=2$, but the general case has been eluding me. How should I attack this?
So I took an introductory abstract algebra course a few semesters ago, and we were shown that groups and rings can both be made into products, i.e. if I have some group $G$ (resp. ring $R$) and some indexing set $I$, then I can make a group $G^{I}$ (resp. ring $R^{I}$) with the appropriate cardinality. However, it was also demonstrated that for fields, you cannot keep the multiplicative inverse under a product structure, i.e. if I have fields $F_{1}, F_{2}$, then $F_{1} \times F_{2}$ will still be a ring, but you will not (not just "not in general", but won't) have multiplicative inverses for all non-zero (i.e. not $(0, 0)$) elements, as you could pick $(0, x)$, where $x \neq 0$. According to Wikipedia, an ultraproduct will preserve field structure, but I'm not sure what the cardinality of $\prod_{i \in I} F_{i} / \mathscr{U}$ would be in general.  I saw  that said you could make a field of arbitrarily large cardinality by extending a given field through throwing in a whole bunch of "transcendental" elements. The example given was that if I had $\mathbb{Q}$, I could start by dumping in the complexes, but then I suppose after that I'd just start throwing in dogs and cats or something; I'm really not sure what that responder meant, and ceteris paribus, my dogs tend to stay inside, so I'd rather keep them out of my fields, particularly the large ones the thread was interested in.  Moreover, the thread mentioned earlier seemed more concerned with just making the fields big. My question is a bit more nuanced: Given any cardinality $\kappa &gt; 1$, can I generally construct a field $F$ of a cardinality $\kappa$? Moreover, how vague do I have to be about it (i.e. do I have to use some really choicy methods, or can I make it a bit more straightforward)?  Thanks.  EDIT: Sorry. I am aware that for finite fields, you are limited to powers of primes. I meant for infinite cardinals. How to show $\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{a^n+b^n}=\max \{a,b\}$? Let $a\geq 0$ and $ b\geq 0$. Prove that $\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{a^n+b^n}=\max \{a,b\}$. [Hint: Use the identity $(a^n -b^n)=(a-b)(\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}a^ib^{n-1-i})$]    I need some help! I cannot do it even with the hint... :( What is $\mathbb{E}[W(s)\mathrm{e}^{W(S)}]$ where W(S) is a standard Brownian Motion? I know that since it is a Brownian motion that $W(s)\sim{N(0,s)}$. One approach I tried, was to see that $W(s)-W(0)\sim N(0,1)$ and to let $X = W(s)$ and then solve $\mathbb{E}[X\mathrm{e}^X]$ but I end up with some awful integral. I was wondering whether there was an easier way? Or perhaps a simple way to solve this integral: $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2{\pi}s}}x\mathbb{e}^{x}\mathbb{e}^{-\frac{x^2}{2s}}$ I am teaching myself information about groups, but don't really understand how to work through this problem. Here is what I have been thinking so far (please note that I do not need to work through showing any closure): $\mathbb{Z}^*$ denotes the nonzero integers. Prove or disprove: $(\mathbb{Z}^*, \cdot)$ and/or $(\mathbb{Z}^*, \div)$ is a group.  For $(\mathbb{Z}^*, \cdot)$:  Group. Associative Law: Let $a,b,c \in \mathbb{Z}^*$. Then $(a\cdot b)\cdot c=a\cdot (b \cdot c)$, and the associative law holds. Existence of Identity: Let $a \in \mathbb{Z}^*$, then $a \cdot 1 = 1 \cdot a = a$, and the identity holds. Existence of Inverses: Let $a \in \mathbb{Z}^*$. Then the inverse of $a^{-1}=-a$, and the inverse holds. Note that this only works because we are ommitting zero.  Hopefully this looks like I am on the right track. I don't know to what extent I can explain logic vs showing it with mathematical operations, so I would appreciate guidance in this respect.  For $(\mathbb{Z}^*, \div)$: Not a group. Disprove by counterexample.  Yeah, I dunno about this one. I don't think it's true, because we will be introduction rational expressions that won't allow this to hold, but I'm not sure where I can use this information to disprove the statement. Is there any parameter (in terms of physical quantities such as mass, length, charge...) which can be used to decide when to treat a system quantum mechanically and not classically? Show inbox updates in the page title Background  Recently  was implemented. With this feature the amount of questions with new activity is shown in parenthesis at the beginning of the page title, e.g.     (2) Meta Stack Overflow   means that MSO has two questions with new activity since the user last viewed it.   this feature is unrelated to inbox updates. Here is an example to illustrate this:    Even though there are two inbox messages in this screenshot this is not reflected by the page title. The page title is currently only sensitive to questions with new activity.  Suggestion  I suggest that the page title also reflects inbox updates. For the screenshot above this would mean that the page title shows that there are two inbox updates and two questions with new activity.  I am not sure what format is best for showing this. For chat * in the page title is used to show that there are messages directed at you which is similar in meaning to inbox updates. However, * if is placed after the number in parenthesis to denote inbox updates there might be confusion as there is no connection between the number in parenthesis and * like in chat. Thus, one might prefer another format such as one of the following (all are meant to reflect the status of the screenshot above):      * (2) Meta Stack Overflow     2* (2) Meta Stack Overflow     [2] (2) Meta Stack Overflow     2i 2q  Meta Stack Overflow     (2/2)  Meta Stack Overflow     (2|2)  Meta Stack Overflow    For the alternatives without an explicit hint of which number refers to what it might be best to place the number for questions with new activity first as it will in most cases be greater. This will to a greater degree avoid combinations such as "(0/2)" which may be confused zero of two.  An advantage of the suggested feature is that if the user has a browser tab with a Stack Exchange site then they will be instantly notified of inbox updates. They do not need to focus a tab with a Stack Exchange site to know if there are inbox updates, they merely have to check the relevant page titles among their tabs.  A disadvantage of the suggested feature is that it might be experienced as verbose. I suggest that it is implemented such that it is as unobtrusive as possible while still being informative. Think of a situation where a user has   one Meta Stack Overflow tab with two inbox updates relating to Meta Stack Overflow and two questions with new activity, and one Super User tab with one inbox updates relating to Super User and three questions with new activity.   Then the sum of the inbox notification in the page titles should be local to sites and not global. The page titles for the tabs above should be something like the following pair:      2i 2q  Meta Stack Overflow     1i 3q  Super User How to Avoid Precision Errors While Creating Numpy Arrays? Let $S$ and $T$ be finite non-empty sets such that $|S| = |T|$. Show that the function $f : S\to T$ is onto if and only if it is one-to-one. This is a recent homework bonus question assigned in my Proofs and Conjectures class. It (evidently) includes and evaluates our understanding of elementary-set theory and how to determine and prove that the function f is onto and one-to-one. I haven't been able to really grasp firmly how it is we do this. Help would be much appreciate, thank you. equality of two operators... Please help me with the following problem( give some hints or references):  Let $X$ be a Banach space and $B(X)$ be the algebra of bounded linear operators on $X$. Suppose that $A$ and $B$ are two operators in $B(X)$ such that for every $T \in B(X)$ we have $\sigma(AT)=\sigma(BT)$. Show that $A=B$.  Here $\sigma(A)$ denotes the spectrum of $A$, i.e., the the set of all complex numbers $\lambda$ such that $\lambda I − A$ has no inverse in $B(X)$.  Thanks in advance. How to bottle your own homemade salad dressing Excel How to make Text Qualifier editable or add a new entry in the existing list? Set of discontinuity of monotone function is countable The result I am trying to prove is the following:     Let $F:\Bbb R\to\Bbb R$ be increasing. Then the set of points, at which it is discontinuous, is countable.   I have been reading this form Folland's Real Analysis and he proves this by considering the sum $\sum_{|x|&lt;N}[F(x^+)-F(x^-)]$ which has to be finite by some sort of telescoping sum. Now, I am not sure how he defines this sum. I am assuming he does this by using nets (let me know if there is another way to look at this), but he doesn't introduce the concept of nets until the next chapter. So I was looking for some other ways to prove this result and I found the following result (from Stein-Shakarchi) which is quite similar but assumes $F$ to be bounded.      A bounded increasing function $F$ on $[a,b]$ has at most countably many discontinuities.   This is shown by using the density of rationals in $\Bbb R$, i.e. $\exists r_x\in\Bbb Q$ s. t. $F(x^-)&lt;r_x&lt;F(x^+)$ corresponding to each point of discontinuity $x$.   Now I feel like there shouldn't be a problem in doing the exact same thing for unbounded increasing function. Is this right? Secondly how does this proof relate to the first one? I feel like there isn't much of a difference between the two proofs. To be precise I think that the previous sum is well defined/finite because of this countability of discontinuous points. What do you think about this way of thinking?  Edit. Here is the Folland's proof in more detail:  Since $F$ is increasing, the intervals $(F(x^-),F(x^+))$ are disjoint for all $\forall x\in\Bbb R$. Moreover,  $\forall|x| &lt; N$ such intervals are contained in $(F(-N),F(N^+))$ and so  $$\sum_{|x|&lt;N}[F(x^+)-F(x^-)] \leqslant F(N) - F(-N) &lt; \infty. $$ Hence the set $\{ x \in (-N,N) : F(x^+) \neq F(x^-)\}$ is countable. I was thinking of the noted 1980 paper by Sidney Coleman and Frank de Luccia--"Gravitational effects of and on vacuum decay"-- about metastable vacuum states that could tunnel to a lower energy "true vacuum" with catastrophic results. I suspect the answer is that if our vacuum is a false one, we wouldn't "see" the true one til it hit us. How to prevent click events on the document body (maybe a bug in Cordova?) How can I identify what application is using a given file? I'm trying to delete some folder but this error is preventing from doing it:     Cannot delete [FileName]: It is being used by another person or program.      Close any programs that might be using the file and try again.   How can I identify what application is using the file?   I want to end the application using a Task Manager, but I didn't know what application is using it.  The folder is not shared and my user account is an administrator. Parsing XML, JSON, and newer data file formats in UNIX using command line utilities The Unix environment has some excellent tools for parsing text in various forms. However, of late, the data is not in the traditional (historical) formats (CSV, TSV, record-based or some other delimiter-based) it used to be before. Data these days is exchanged in structured formats like XML/JSON.  I know there are some good tools like sed, awk and Perl which can chew down nearly any form of data out there. However, to work with this sort of structured data, often one has to write a complete program, and, given the little time available to extract information, one has to sit down and figure out the whole logic of what one wants to query and put it down programmatically. Sometimes this is not OK – basically because the information extracted from those files acts as inputs for further work; also because of the time it takes to search for the appropriate solution and code it up. A command line tool is needed with sufficient switches to find, query and dump data.  I'm looking for tools that take a XML/JSON or other forms of structured data and dump it into other formats like csv, etc., so that from there one could use other commands to get any information out of it.  Are there any command line utilities you know of which do this kind of a job? Are there already awk/Perl scripts available to this? Batch/Multi rename only files with a specific number range I have a situation where I have the following:  file01.ext . . . file99.ext file100.ext . . .   And I want to (using rename ) insert the '0' for the files 01-99 (so that they become 000-099) but not modify files larger than 100. Which expression should I use and what is a good source on learning regular expressions such as these?   On Windows I would have used Total Commander's multi rename function which has a very simple renaming syntax. Are there some good alternatives for that tool (multi-rename) for Ubuntu? systemd gives us the systemctl commands suite which is mostly used to enable services to start at boot time. We can also start, stop, reload, restart and check status of services with the help of systemctl.  We can do, for example, sudo systemctl enable service_name, and service_name will automatically start at boot time. We can also disable services not to start at boot time.  Is the only difference between the service and systemctl commands that systemctl can be used to enable the start of services at run time? Can we use systemctl on any service? What other significant differences are there? Why are there no animals in "The Matrix"? Aside from the repetitive appearance of the black cat, I can't remember seeing any living animals, either inside the Matrix simulation or in Zion.  How come? Is there an in-universe explanation? I have to do proof of $(a+b)^n$ and $(a+b)^{n+1}$ with mathematical induction.  I finished the first one $(a+b)^n = a^n + na^{n-1}b+\dots+b^n$.  I however have trouble with the second one, I don't know what to start exactly. Any help/hints?