This may seem simple, but I'm trying to make sure I do it right:
Wondering why I need to reattach the "front airbox" if I put in a DCI. It seems unnecessary once it's no longer connected to the factory aibox. Is this just to route air to where the cones are?
Hey you. YEAH, YOU.
Is the crushing weight of that MSR fuel canister making you MISERABLE?
Do you want to feel like you aren't lying when you scream "YOU'RE AN ULTRALIGHTER!!!" into the mirror every morning?!
Did you try cold-soaking, only to find that it made the world appear bleak and devoid of meaning?
Then you need an ultralight stove setup! Here are three options:
[SOLD] QiWiz Firefly UL, 2.8 oz, 3.3 w/ included storage bag
Pics: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gpf2HyTcxlof9Vtbia4CZxDgbqLPaRQP?usp=sharing
Leave the fuel at home! This charming little wood-burner consists of four titanium walls, one of which has a door, a mesh insert, and a titanium floor for collecting ash. It disassembles and can be stored flat, and is very easy to reassemble. Used numerous times. Rob (AKA QiWiz), the designer, has a lot of helpful instructional videos on his web site, and there are also YouTube videos that provide some helpful tutorials for the most efficient burning practices. It came with a storage bag (basically a heavy duty zip-lock bag) that is partially damaged (one of the edges separated) but one don't need to use it. $35 + shipping.
[SOLD] QiWiz Dual-Fuel Burner w/ Mesh Potstand and Titantium Windscreen, 1.6 oz
Pics: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vIL17hpVlYnnz47WR7sUm3ozl5Ql04dX?usp=sharing
This three-piece set includes the dual-fuel alcohol stove, mesh pot stand, and titanium windscreen. The windscreen is 5.75" in diameter by 3" high and ideal for a pot between 4.5 and 5" wide. The windscreen nest neatly inside the potstand and the whole system can easily fit in an appropriately matched pot. Only tested this a few times and is in excellent condition. $15.00 + shipping.
[SOLD] Trail Designs 12-10 + Caldera Cone + Accessories, 2.0 oz for just cone and stove, 5.2 with accessories
Pics: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1has43dJHikHdKA3ki5D0f7OLb8UBKE5k?usp=sharing
This is a Trail Designs 12-10 alcohol stove and Caldera Cone system. The design channels heat very efficiently. In addition to the stove and cone, this comes with all of the included accessories pictured above: carrying caddy, fuel bottle, and small measuring cup. The aluminu
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Could someone help me understand the intuition behind this, e.g. in the 2d case? Especially the minimum element part. I understand the proof of this, but not the intuition behind it.
Does S have to be included in K? Also, in the case of the first drawing, the lines {lambda^T z | z in R^2} intersect at 0, so x is 0, right?
I don't really get where the hyperplans are, and why the minimizer of S also minimizes those hyperplans..
Thanks for the help!
Back at one of my old part time jobs, I was working at an up and coming ice cream shop. It was typically pretty busy and fast paced until after 7pm (we were open til 10pm).
At 9:45pm, a man very blatantly intoxicated comes by and mumbles he wanted “one of everything, all waffle cones!” Very loudly. I specified, “sir, we got 15 flavors at the moment, are you sure you want one of everything?” “Yes! Yes! Everything!” “Are you ordering for others?” “NAWHhh, I want it all!” He shouted.
Typically we charged the customers AFTER they receive and are satisfied with their ice cream, but this drunkard insisted he pay beforehand because he “didn’t feel like waiting”. I advised against this, but he insisted.
After the transaction, i began handing him ice cream cone after ice cream cone. By the third cone he began to look extremely confused. After the fifth cone (at this point, he already had ice cream all over his jacket sleeves) he mumbled some incoherent gobbledygook and I hand him the sixth cone, suddenly he spilled all of them all over himself and the floor. He seemed more confused at how he got to that point than anything. I offered to call my manager to help with a refund, but the drunkard yelled back, “I don’t need you!” And left for a neighboring bar. He never came back for the refund.
Hello,
There is probably a nice reason for this but I am not seeing it. If f: A -> B is a map of chain complexes the differential of cone(f) is given by d(a,b) = (-d(a), d(b) - f(a)) whereas in the dual case(A and B are cochain complexes) the differential of cone(f) is d(a,b) = (-d(a), d(b) + f(a)). I think I see why they would both define chain complexes since their compositions are zero (by the usual multiplication of matrices argument).
Why is f negative in in the case of chain complexes but positive in the dual case? I suspect it has to do with relating it to the connecting morphism as in Weibel lemma 1.5.6 but that isn't clear to me.
Thank you in advance for your help.
