How can I determine if an extension is compatible with a new Civi version?

Question: What is the best way to determine whether an extension is likely to be compatible with a contemporary Civi version rather than just not updated to reflect as much?
Answer: If you go to the Extension page eg https://civicrm.org/extensions/civivolunteer then you should see a RELEASES section near the bottom which states what version of CiviCRM the extension is known to work for. This may be obvious, but your question doesn't explain what you have already done to check.
Comment: Thanks, Pete.  I should have been more descriptive.  I was asked to re-post the question apart from a previous two-part question and should have provided more context.
Answer: The best practice for upgrading is to upgrade a copy of your site on a "staging" or "development" server.  That's a good time to test your extensions to see if they work.
Short of testing the extension, I don't know that there's a good way to ensure an extension works.  However, you can:

Read the code, if you know how.  If it's all (or almost all) using API calls rather than BAO calls, you're probably safe.
If you DO determine it to work well, post an issue on the ticket tracker for the extension (usually on Github) saying you tested it successfully with the latest version.

There's a volunteer extension review team, and their job mainly covers reviewing new extensions, not existing ones - but if there were more people, we could do this sort of testing!
With regard to this particular extension - it's mostly BAO calls, not API calls - but there's so little code, I'd be pretty surprised if it didn't work as-is on version 4.6.


How large can an address index be?

Question: How large can an address index be? In the use case where a sensor is frequently sending transactions, an address would need to be generated for each transaction in order to keep funds secure.
Comment: Why would the sensor send non-zero transactions?
Answer: The Java Library uses int as the type for the index (source code on Github).
The strict equivalent of the Java int is long int in C, which is 2,147,483,647.
But this is only a limitation of the library. The nodes don't need to know about this, so the library could be changed to support bigger numbers, provided that wallets in other languages also support those bigger numbers. Python: sys.maxint = 9,223,372,036,854,775,807
There's also the possibility of using different seeds. Like have an algorithm generate a new seed per month.
Comment: Yes, but don't worry about it, because the PoW won't let you send more than 1 tx per 5 seconds... (if you're lucky)
Comment: So currently, an easy way to handle this would be every 2,147,483,646 send transactions, generate a new seed and move to that seed? (if you are using the Java Library)
Comment: Good point, with current hardware that would give us ~340 years worth of continuous txs. Though future hardware could potentially make this a real problem
Answer: You can (in the practical sense) have unlimited addresses for a seed. The address index is added to the front of the seed. This means that multiple seeds with a different first character can point to the same address chain but with a different entry point. When you create a lot of addresses, you just run through a bunch of different seeds over time.
Because the amount of combinations is so big, this won't affect security much.

How large can an address index be?


Are User Stories from Sprint Backlog assigned to individual developers?

Question: Let's suppose the development team is planning the next Sprint. What does it technically mean that a User Story is added to the Sprint Backlog? Is it assigned to a developer or to the whole team? (If it's assigned to the whole development team, then how do we do this in Jira?)
Comment: Related: https://pm.stackexchange.com/questions/27861/in-jira-kanban-do-we-change-assignee-as-a-work-item-goes-through-the-workflow/27862#27862
Answer: When the team plans a sprint, they pull product backlog items or user stories from the top of the backlog and into their sprint. The stories they selected to do that sprint now form the "sprint backlog".
Now, concerning assignment of these stories... it depends.
As part of the planning, developers also can decide who does what. Jake could assign himself Story 1, Jane could assign herself Story 2, and so on. That's a visual indicator of who does what work, but it's not actually mandatory. The team owns all of the stories, no matter the individual who works on them.
For example, I worked in a team where we didn't assign the stories. Almost all of us were full stack developers so we just took stories and worked on them as we became available. We knew who was working on what because we were in the same office, we communicated when taking new stuff to work on, and we synchronized and planned our work during the daily. So stories were moving from TODO to IN PROGRESS without being assigned to anyone. Jira has no problem doing that. The story just shows up as UNASSIGNED in Jira.
So it depends on what you want to do. If you find the information useful to see, you can assign a story. If not, the team will still know how to organize themselves and do the work.
Answer: The November 2020 Scrum Guide says:

The Sprint Backlog is composed of the Sprint Goal (why), the set of Product Backlog items selected for the Sprint (what), as well as an actionable plan for delivering the Increment (how).

In this definition, the unit of work is not defined. That is, the Product Backlog Item may not be the unit of work that is Done by one or more members of the Development Team.
In my experience, most teams do one of two things. One common approach is for the Product Backlog Items to be allocated to one or more members of the Development Team. The team itself decides how this work is allocated, but the sign of a self-organizing team is frequently self-assignment and a pull-based approach. Another approach is that a team decomposes the Product Backlog Items into subtasks and those subtasks are allocated to members of the Development Team. Again, self-assignment and pulling work indicate a self-organizing team.
The exact "assignment" depends on the practices of the team and the tooling. Practices such as pair programming and mob programming have two or more people working on a single unit of work, so there isn't a single assignee. However, even in these cases, a team may opt to decide on a single person to "own" the work and they would be identified as the assignee. The tooling also matters since tools may have limitations on who is allowed to be an assignee. For example, Jira only allows one person in the assignee field, so teams may leave this blank, create team accounts, or use custom fields as a workaround.
Specifically, in Jira, you have several options:

Add a "Team" custom field. This is generally helpful in an environment with multiple teams working on one Product Backlog but can be useful to help identify which team has taken on responsibility for the work.
Add a "Paired" custom field. The default Assignee field can be used if there is a single owner while the new custom field can be a list of users who are pairing or mobbing on the work.
Do nothing. If you're using the Scrum configuration with Sprints, you don't need an assignee to bring items into Sprints or move things along a Sprint Board.
Answer: It's up to the team to create the sprint backlog based on the backlog items chosen by the Product Owner. Some teams do use sprint planning to allocate at least some items to individual developers, other teams adopt a "pull system", meaning items are not pre-allocated and it's up to each individual to pick up items off the backlog when they have the capacity to do so.
In Jira, if you want an issue to be worked on by more than one person then the easiest way is to have each developer create their own separate sub-tasks assigned to themselves.
Answer: A "story" does not necessarily correspond 1:1 with a development task.  You need to determine from the story what needs to be done, and by whom, in order to complete it.
Comment: Yes!  This answer highlights a common mistake (misconception).
Answer: Since you're asking about user stories, not tasks: A user story usually consists of several tasks that can be tackled by different team members, sometimes even different crafts. That means that, while you can certainly assign team members to any of the story's tasks (though you don't have to do that, either), the story is more likely to be owned by the team as a whole.
There can be exceptions, of course. For example, you could have a user story entirely made up of tasks that can only be solved by a specialist in the team, so it might make sense to assign the story to this person to make that visible.
Answer: We have component ownership (there is a business lead and development lead for each).
We personally didn't automate the assignment of the ticket to DEV lead, but automated to assign to business lead according to the component (first component mentioned in the ticket - responsible assignee - it's set up in the Project's settings on JIRA).
Once the story is ready for development, business lead/ regular analyst re-assigns it to the proper DEV lead (in order to get rid of code ownership there is a rotation of DEV leads, so we refer to a specific table on confluence - it's updated by project manager).
It's more relevant for us, because business lead always knows the proper person, as business lead does usually collaborate with DEV lead of the component on LOE estimation, proposals to the Customer, etc.
Seems like a little overhead, but irl it's not.
Answer: As Bogdan already mentioned: "the team owns all of the stories", & the team should also owns the way to get those stories done. I mean pre-assigning to individual member or pulling when sprint progress are both fine.
One practice in my team is we always have individual owner at story level even when multiple members involve. The owner will be in charge (in front of the team) to facilitate all sub-tasks & relevant members to get the whole story done.


Why does my mono microphone have a three-pin plug?

Question: On headphones three pins are used for stereo and two pins for mono, yet on microphones three pins are often used for mono; why? Also why is a oddly-shaped plug (XLR) used rather than a jack?
Comment: I tend to ask myself, why to so many instruments use those @#^$%^ unbalanced jacks, instead of decent XLR connections which would actually work reliably...
Comment: An [XLR connector](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLR_connector) is *balanced*, with a separate audio circuit (send and return have one connector each) and earthing for the shield. Headphones are unbalanced, the audio return for both stereo signals is shared with the ground.
Comment: I think e.g. http://music.stackexchange.com/q/24065/12202 and http://music.stackexchange.com/q/24275/12202 address it better than I could - there are quite a few other posts on [un]balanced audio and connectors
Comment: Just for background, I wish to be able to link to a GREAT answer on this question from another question when it looks like the person has no concept of how electrical signals work.     I am not able to write a great answer myself as I understand the engineering too well, so can't put myself into the mindset of someone that does not.
Comment: @jonrsharpe Your comment looks like a good answer to me.
Answer: XLR is designed to carry a "balanced" signal. Pin 1 is ground, Pin 2 is "in phase" or "+" and Pin 3 is "out of phase" or "-". See for example http://www.clarkwire.com/pinoutxlrbalanced.htm
The reason is the following: The microphone signals are very low so they are vulnerable to noise that gets injected into the cable especially if the run is long. Noise gets typically injected into both signals the same way. The receiver than forms the difference between the + and the - signal. That cancels the noise. Since the "-" signal is out of phase, the difference is actually twice the desired signal.
The"balanced" approach also helps with avoiding ground loops in larger systems. The actual signal is always the difference between "+" and "-" and therefore no ground is needed.
The choice of male vs female is guide by "no exposed pins should go into the amplifier". Pins can be touched which can create a lot of noise, pops or even damage a loudspeaker. Hence inputs are female and outputs are male.
Comment: And out of phase meaning exactly phase-reversed by 180 degree... ;-) Any noise that affects both signals is in phase. By turning the phase 180 degrees at the output end once more - back to 0/360 degrees, the dirty signal is now phase-inverted and gets totally eliminated and the mic-input gets doubled. If you listened to the signal without the second phase-inversion you would hear no original signal ( it's inverted now) only the dirty signal - doubled of course, because there are two wires...
Answer: Signal/ground/shield are the three leads to a mono microphone. Or +/-/sheild. On other occasion there will be phantom power to the microphone  to turn it on or to provide voltage to active electronics. Etc... Etc... The fact is that your microphone being mono is not the reason why it has three leads it can operate with two. There are three leads because the cable is shielded or insulated against interference. The 1/4 inch phono plug compatable with this is "tip-ring-sleeve" however more popular and standard for microphones is "xlr" the industry standard.


how do you destroy magnetic field - demagnetize?

Question: And what happens with the magnetic field of a star that goes supernova? The magnetic radiation is scattered through the cosmos? Each particle will go away with its own magnetic radiation?
Comment: There is no such thing as magnetic radiation, All radiation is electromagnetic.
Answer: In a star the magnetic field isn't a "thing" in it's own right, it's the result of motion of charged particles in the star. When a supernova goes bang the matter ejected will have some peculiar motion, i.e. motion relative to the overall outward flow, and as a result there will be magnetic fields in the ejected matter. These fields will get gradually weaker as the matter expands and dilutes, and will eventually merge with the magnetic fields in the host galaxy.
I had a quick Google and found this review discussing the magnetic fields in supernova remnants. This would be a good start if you're interested in the area.
Answer: To answer your title demagnetization is accomplished simply by passing an object in an oscillating magnetic field the higher the oscillations the faster that objects field is neutralized.
My attempt at responding to the body of your question follows:
Although there may be some demagnetization occurring the bulk of magnetic material will stay charged and blend in with the matter spread throughout the universe but this material will itself in fact have a residual magnetic field although compared to the background it will seem arbitrary.


Natural treatment of chronic prostatitis - Does herbal medicines have side affects?

Question: I have had prostatitis for several years. Since almost all antibiotics were not helpful to me due to drug resistance, I am trying to find some natural treatment of chronic prostatitis, so I Googled one diuretic and anti-inflammatory pill. How does it cure prostatitis? any successful cases? What are the side effects?
Comment: Every medication regardless of origin has side affects
Comment: Welcome to Health! This question seems to be asking for personal medical advice, which is [not considered on-topic on Health.SE](https://health.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/56/are-personal-medical-advice-questions-on-topic-here). If you can, please edit your question to remove the request for personal health advice. Thanks :)
Comment: As @Chris says, welcome to Health! I have taken your question as requesting information on the condition and side-effects in general, rather than in your specific case. That said, I hope you can find something that works for you.
Answer: Herbal medicines do have side effects
The answer to any "does this have side-effects?" question is  invariably yes.
Some drugs/medications/herbal remedies will have fewer side effects, some will have more. Additionally (or alternatively), the side effects may vary by strength, or by how common they are, or any a number of other ways.
I could not find any listing of ingredients or side effects for the example herbal medicine you mentioned.
What about this diuretic and anti-inflammatory pill
I looked for your "one diuretic and anti-inflammatory pill", and found just that: a bunch of results about something literally named Diuretic and Anti-inflammatory Pill.
It claims to have at least three different effects*; frankly, it is hard to know what, if anything, it does without knowing what the ingredients are.
There is a small Reddit discussion of the pill, which may be of interest.
Why might not antibiotics 'cure' prostatitis?
Acute prostatitis is often caused by E. coli, but chronic prostatitis is a bit different. Chronic prostatitis can follow acute prostatitis, but often it is abacterial- as such, antibotics won't be effective.
(That would be Category III prostatitis, in NIH categorisation, which overlaps with Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CPPS)).
References

Acute prostatitis - Summary
Chronic prostatitis: results of an Internet survey
Chronic prostatitis - Healthline
Natural Herbal Prostatitis Treatment: Diuretic and Anti-inflammatory Pill (No endorsement implied by linking to this)
Diuretic and anti-inflammatory pill?? (Reddit)
NIH consensus definition and classification of prostatitis.

*: You can read the claims yourself, I don't wish to lend them any implied credence by reproducing them here.
Comment: Providing or looking for information on what "can" help when you have no ability to effectively diagnose the problem can be dangerous.  How do you know the problem is CPPS and not any other kind of Prostatitis?  Giving medical advice is frowned upon here for safety reasons
Comment: If you wish to provide a general answer without risk of giving what can be considered medical advice, I would just stick to the side effects risks just as you have, although again this can differ from person to person.  How medication works and what treatment paths **may** be required should be left to the OPs doctor who has the ability to effectively diagnose the problem and give the correct advice.  Giving something which **might** help could exacerbate the problem, and in extreme cases with some medical conditions it could lead to death.
Comment: I have removed that section. If you have any further suggestions or feel it could be improved further, please let me know.


What payload was expected for the 2018 Mars Dragon flight ("Red Dragon")

Question: SpaceX has long been planning to use Dragon capsules to carry objects anywhere in the Solar System. They have officially announced a 2018 launch to Mars. Specifically, the launch window is April-May time frame, about 2 years from how. What, if any, payload are they expecting to launch, given only 2 years of preparation?
Answer: Aviation Week seems to be the best source right now. A few interesting bits:

NASA is spending up to $30 million in support, mostly to help gain information for EDL on Mars.
A photo might be taken using either ground-based sources, or orbital sources, to help the process.
The specific plans will be outlined at the International Astronautical Congress in Guadalajara, Mexico in September 2016.
The partnership with NASA is only in effect for the 2018 launch, not for a future launch window.
EDL data will be gathered by the orbiters in real time, in case the spacecraft doesn't survive the landing.
SpaceX will determine the payload, NASA wants to include the following: Mars-weather sensors, instruments to analyze atmospheric dust, and experimental in situ resource utilization gear.
On board video will likely be used to image the plumes during decent. This video will be uploaded upon a successful landing.

Bottom line, it seems that most of the payload will be in EDL data, but there will likely be a few small experiments done that haven't been prioritized previously.
Other point of interest, it seems likely that they want the landing sequence to go over one of the rovers on Mars first, probably in the Supersonic Retropropulsion phase. Not sure what that means for it's eventual landing site, but it likely won't be that far away from one of the existing rovers on Mars.
Comment: I hope we see some more details on the experimental ISRU gear.
Comment: I'm sure we will, but they probably just aren't ready. My guess is the Mars Society experiment of producing methane from the atmosphere of Mars and hydrogen...
Comment: As a follow up it looks like [this was cancelled](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Red_Dragon) or at least postponed.
Comment: @Erik Cancelled. SpaceX is using the money for BFR instead. But this was the best answer that could be had at the time, so...
Comment: @PearsonArtPhoto I wasn't objecting to your answer. I stumbled across the question today and was curious what the state of the launch was so I did a quick search and posted a link for others who might be interested.
Answer: In 2018 Red Dragon flight primary mission would be to prove a soft landing for a human rated vehicle, but this mission is also an opportunity to conclude even some others objectives. SpaceX cooperating with NASA has considered before a drilling mission concept searching for signs of water and current or prior life existence. According Wikipedia and this link in the Mission Concept procedures is included even this point:

Deploy surface systems & commence surface operations.

And in the drilling mission concept goals are:

Scientific goals
Search for evidence of life
Assess subsurface habitability
Establish the origin, distribution, and composition of ground ice
Reconstruct climate using ground ice record
Human precursor goals
Conduct human-relevant EDL demonstrations
Assess potential hazards in dust, regolith, and ground ice
Characterize resources
Demonstrate access to subsurface resources
Conduct ISRU demonstration

Possible similar payloads for drilling mission.
A payload for drilling at the Red Dragon spacecraft is a concept supported by Dr. John Karcz at (Ames Research Center) known as NASA Ames in this link.
A possible drilling system is a technology used by Zaptec company, a Norwegian company which uses a method called Plasma Channel drilling, or Electropulse drilling.
According nextbigfuture.com:

On Mars, the proposed Zaptec system will allow a depth of 2 km to be reached with less than 1 metric ton of surface payload housed in a SpaceX Dragon-sized capsule and peak power requirements of less than 2 kW.

Zaptec deep drilling system capable of reaching a depth of 2 km, deployed from a SpaceX Dragon-class landed capsule.
This SpaceX mission to Mars is a good opportunity to include this kind of payloads for scientific studies. Probably until 2018 mission, could be difficult developing and fitting the Red Dragon spacecraft type with a Zaptec drilling system, but maybe a less complicated system also smaller and easier to fit with the Red Dragon lander could be as an option.
Comment: The drilling system seems unlikely for the first lander, it's going to be a more expensive custom built kind of thing that a dedicated mission might do, but a single test isn't likely to do. I think what you have is a generic list of proposed red dragon missions, not for this specific mission.
Answer: The article you linked makes it pretty clear that the goal is to test powered landing of Dragon spacecraft. Hence, I expect little to no payload at all. Of course there might be some token experiment, but it really does not need to be.
What I do expect is some magnificent PR coverage of the whole event. So there will be some sort of moving pictures from the landing site. So probably small rovers or drones mainly equipped with decent camcorders. Maybe even some kind of coverage of the landing itself (by a capsule jettisoned during descent).
A second guess would be everything remotely usable for future missions. Any kind of equipment that would be usable for future colonists/explorers: Life support, basic tools, basic materials (water, oxygen, soil) even a small greenhouse. All this stuff is readily available and could be taken off the shelf.
edit: Whatever you put into the Dragon, the capsule remains a spacecraft intended for docking or manned landing. In order to unload bulkier experiments, a major structural refactoring would be in order, so I definitely do not expect large rovers, excavation equipment and the like.
Comment: I can't imagine an empty Dragon being launched to Mars. SOMEONE will have some payload they are willing to risk for a free trip to Mars, even with a likely crash. Some small lab at NASA, a University, even the Mars Society. Even SpaceX themselves might have something. I don't expect it to be pretty, but... Rovers and drones would both be rather complex payload, but I think your second guess might be closer to reality. Hmmm...
Comment: @PearsonArtPhoto  Have we ever landed organisms on Mars?  Some hardy insects or microbes might be able to make the journey.  A bit of science from testing how interplanetary space affects them, a milestone for Earth life, and good press coverage all in one?
Comment: Not intentionally, and NASA isn't likely to be very keen on it. I suppose it is remotely possible, but... I doubt they want to send such things on a likely crash course.
Comment: Elon Musk wanted to put a greenhouse on Mars before he founded SpaceX. For sure, there will be biological elements to the payload. Tech demo for Mars colonization, to turn it to a retirement home for the elderly. (Other billionaires fancy becoming president of the old world, or whatever it is called nowadays)
Comment: Note that there are some advantages to no payload (or a trivial payload) - the less weight you carry, the more wiggle room you have for underperformance in launch, transfer burns, or landing.
Answer: SpaceX/Elon Musk will be 'debugging' the process of delivering payloads and/or humans to the surface of Mars.
So my guess is that they would have a payload that would be equivalent to 2-7 astronauts + minimal life support (enough for descent + getting to their next objective/base)
When I say equivalent I mean in mass and weight balance. Some of that would be sensors to measure the vibrations etc that a 'real' astronaut (marsonaut?) would experience.
That would be a 'primary' mission. Something like: 'Can we ride marsonauts down to mars on a red dragon/discover what we need to do, to be able to?'
A secondary mission might be to deliver a small (i.e., cheap incase dragon fails) science payload from NASA or the European Space Agency etc. and/or several 'cubesat' like payloads from universities etc (presumably piggybacking on the dragons communications, to relay data back to earth).
Comment: Down vote with out a comment, bad form folks.


Is Latin considered a holy language in the Catholic Church?

Question: I've heard that many Roman Catholic Churches still hold Mass services and particularly ceremonies (e.g. weddings) in Latin. Is this true, and if so why is Latin considered to be a better language than the native language(s) of the region in which the church is in?
Comment: Your question is what I was really trying to ask in this one: http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/12267/is-there-a-special-significance-attached-to-a-latin-mass  +1 for asking it more clearly.
Comment: @DavidStratton Do we then have duplicate questions?
Answer: Yes, prior to the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Mass finished by 1970, Latin was the language used at Mass throughout the world.  The change to the vernacular didn't change the official language of the Catholic Church which is Latin.
Many parts of the Mass are still (or can be) proclaimed in Latin.  If you've got some time, watch or listen to the Mass on EWTN.  I think there's a lot more Latin in that Mass than there is in the average town's parish.  I think there are at least two reasons for that:

It is beautiful

They've got a handful of priests who are familiar with the language.

Beyond that, it was obviously the desire of Mother Angelica to have a more traditional (and therefore holy, beautiful and sacred) liturgy.  But it doesn't make it more "meaningful"; Christ isn't less present at Masses proclaimed in the vernacular.

In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI issued a Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum (only in Latin) in which he said that it was OK by him if people used the old Roman Missal (only in Latin), which incidentally is less than 10 years older than the new one, for their Mass.   This lifted the responsibility from the Bishops to say yes or no and made a few Traditional Catholic groups happy.
But he made it clear that this is the "Extraordinary Form" of the Mass, not the Ordinary one.  And, every time you hear the word "Extraordinary" in the Catholic Church, it indicates something that is not really necessary for salvation in general, but good for some circumstances.  (Extraordinary Ministers of Communion, Extraordinary means of Baptism, etc...)

It's not more holy, in the sense that it is "special in God's eyes". But it certainly is more holy in the traditional sense of the word "set apart", more so today than in the hey day of the Holy Roman Empire.
But, it is the official language of the Church and as long as the Pope is in Rome, it always will be:

The Latin language has always been held in very high esteem by the Catholic Church and by the Roman Pontiffs.
Pope Benedict XVI - Latina Lingua
Comment: Thanks Peter. Are Catholics expected to know Latin to understand what is being heard in the service, or is it just that it sounds beautiful that it should be done? I understand your point about it being the official language of the church but I'm still confused on why Roman Catholics who don't understand what is being said would sit through Mass in Latin
Comment: @Greg: Catholics are expected to understand few phrases the can't avoid anyway; further understanding of Latin is good while attending old, Latin liturgy, but understanding every single word is not the point of the old form of Holy Mass (however, the Bible readings and sermon should be in vernacular even in this form of Mass). The beauty and traditionalism are the biggest reasons why some prefer Latin to vernacular language. Plus, there are language-independent parts of the Holy Mass, especially the Eucharist - that's a good reason for attending Mass in a language I don't understand.
Comment: It was also one of the four languages Pilate (inadvertently) used to proclaim Christ's kingship on the cross, which is another reason why it is held in such high esteem.
Answer: As a very preliminary point, there are several "Rites" within the Roman Catholic Church1 and some of them have never had, and never will have, Latin liturgical services. So all of the below applies specifically to the Roman Rite (which is the most widespread by far).
To lay the basic groundwork: Latin is still the official liturgical language of the Roman Rite. The Scripture readings in the liturgy are translated from various sources, but apart from those, any non-Latin text of any liturgical service has been translated from the official Latin, and the translation itself has been approved by the Vatican.
That said, the everyday liturgical use of Latin is rare and typically confined to monastic or academic settings, and only to a few such settings. In normal parish life you will generally encounter Latin in one of three ways (ordered from most common to least common):

Occasionally, in the Ordinary  Form: This is the form of mass used by almost all Roman Rite Catholics since 1970. No part of it is required to be in Latin but many communities will still use a bit of Latin here and there, sometimes for musical reasons (perhaps a visiting choir singing a mass setting by Palestrina or Mozart), and sometimes as an intentional way of connecting with tradition: My own parish, for example, sings a few brief, simple parts of the mass in Latin during Advent and Lent.
Exclusively, by requirement of the law, in the Extraordinary Form: Colloquially known as the "Tridentine" or "Traditional Latin" mass, this is the form of mass used by Roman Rite Catholics almost everywhere up until about 1964. Some communities still use it regularly or even exclusively. By law this form of the mass has to be celebrated entirely in Latin, with limited, recently-granted (2007), and rarely-used exceptions for the Scripture readings. The law in force here is ordered mainly toward preserving an ancient treasure of the Church during a time of liturgical confusion and rapid change (i.e., the last 40-50 years). Those who prefer this form of mass may or may not personally prefer Latin -- I know people who would love to have the older form of mass in the vernacular and sometimes I lean that way myself.
Liberally, by free choice, in the Ordinary Form: There is a tiny number of parishes where at least some of the masses are celebrated in the post-1970 form but entirely or mainly in Latin. This is very uncommon and there is usually some unique reason for it.

As to why Latin is considered a "better language" there are many answers. Popes Pius XI and John XXIII both solemnly affirmed the general importance of Latin in the life of the Catholic Church, in letters published respectively in 1922 and 1962. They identified, among other things, its universality, immutability and nobility -- not to mention that knowing Latin unlocks a huge treasury of Patristic and ancient literature.
There are also many reasons why an everyday Joe who can barely manage his own native tongue might prefer to worship at a service conducted in Latin. Peter mentions beauty and that's an excellent one. Some of the Latin prayers of the mass have been with us for a thousand or more years precisely because they are exceedingly well-crafted poetic gems. Likewise many long-lived and beautiful sacred-music settings were written for, and best fit, Latin texts.
I would guess that an Orthodox Christian could speak at length on the question of liturgical beauty -- there is a strain of thinking that is muted in current Catholic discourse but I think very strong with the Orthodox, wherein one considers the beauty of a liturgical service objectively or theologically, rather than subjectively or pastorally. From this perspective, the question is less "what is accessible to the people present?" and more "what is most fitting for the Eucharistic worship of almighty God?" This gets complicated, of course, because vernacular liturgy is fairly well-established in the Orthodox Churches.
I mentioned tradition above -- the Catholic Church is big on that, and worshipping in Latin, using the same words that our fellow Catholics have used for a thousand or more years, connects us with our tradition very concretely.
And if I might speculate a bit: Another reason for some people may be that a veil between the worshiper and the act of worship (in this case an intellectual veil) may actually facilitate one's interior participation in that worship. The parish priest who wrote this little book, for example suspects that a surprisingly large number of people actually find themselves in a state of continual distraction when attempting to worship God at a liturgy that is entirely spoken aloud in their own language. Of course this gets into contentious questions about the theology of worship, what it means to "participate", etc.

1 A "Rite" is a coherent liturgical and theological tradition that is usually connected with some particular culture -- non-Latin examples include the Maronite and Byzantine Rites. There are even a few non-Roman Latin Rites
Comment: One thing that almost ruins Holy Thursday in my parish every year is Tantum Ergo in English.  The words don't even make sense in English!
Answer: Why use a scared language in liturgical celebrations? The angelic doctor answers:

The use of a sacred language in the liturgical celebration is part of
  what St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae calls the
  "solemnitas." The Angelic Doctor teaches: "What is found in the sacraments by human institution is not necessary to the validity of
  the sacrament, but confers a certain solemnity, useful in the
  sacraments to exercise devotion and respect in those who receive it"
  (Summa Theologiae III, 64, 2; cf. 83, 4).

Sacred language, being the means of expression not only of individuals, but rather of a community that follows its traditions, is conservative: it maintains the archaic linguistic forms with tenacity.

Sacred language, being the means of expression not only of
  individuals, but rather of a community that follows its traditions, is
  conservative: it maintains the archaic linguistic forms with tenacity.
  Moreover, introduced in it are external elements, in so far as
  associated to an ancient religious tradition. A paradigmatic case is
  the Hebrew biblical vocabulary in the Latin used by Christians (Amen,
  Alleluia, Hosanna, etc.), as St. Augustine already observed (cf. "De
  doctrina christiana," II, 34-35 [11, 16]).

In the course of history a wide variety of languages has been used in Christian worship.

In the course of history a wide variety of languages has been used in
  Christian worship: Greek in the Byzantine tradition; the different
  languages of the Eastern traditions, such as Syriac, Armenian,
  Georgian, Coptic and Ethiopic; Paleo-Slavic; the Latin of the Roman
  rite and of the other Western rites.

Found in all these languages are forms of style that separate them from the "ordinary" or popular language.

Found in all these languages are forms of style that separate them
  from the "ordinary" or popular language. Often this separation is the
  consequence of linguistic developments in the common language, which
  then are not adopted in the liturgical language because of its sacred
  character.

As soon as Greek was replaced by Latin in the Roman liturgy, a highly stylized language was created as a means of worship, which an average Christian of Rome of late antiquity would have had difficulty in understanding.

However, in the case of Latin as language of the Roman liturgy, a
  certain separation has existed since the beginning: Romans did not
  speak in the style of the canon or of the prayers of the Mass. As soon
  as Greek was replaced by Latin in the Roman liturgy, a highly stylized
  language was created as a means of worship, which an average Christian
  of Rome of late antiquity would have had difficulty in understanding.

Why continue using Latin in the Church and in Liturgy?
In an age marked by great mobility and globalization, a common liturgical language could serve as a bond of unity among peoples and cultures, apart from the fact that the Latin liturgy is a unique spiritual treasure that has nourished the life of the Church for many centuries.

In an age marked by great mobility and globalization, a common
  liturgical language could serve as a bond of unity among peoples and
  cultures, apart from the fact that the Latin liturgy is a unique
  spiritual treasure that has nourished the life of the Church for many
  centuries. Undoubtedly, Latin contributes to the sacred and stable
  character "which attracts many to the old use," as Benedict XVI
  wrote in his Letter to Bishops, on the occasion of the publication of
  the "Summorum
  Pontificum"
  (July 7, 2007). With the wider use of the Latin language, an
  altogether legitimate choice, but little used, "in the celebration of
  the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI, could manifest, in a
  stronger way than it has often up to now, that sacredness" (Ibid.).

Source: The Language of Liturgical Celebrations | OFFICE FOR THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATIONS OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
Answer: Even though I am not Catholic, I teach the history of music, and thus, have become somewhat familiar with music practices in the early church. One point that struck me as a very valid one for the continued use of Latin is that it is a dead language. While that may not, at first glance, seem to be an advantage, it really is! We all know many words in our native tongues that have taken on very different meanings over time. Since Latin is not in current use (and hasn't been for many, many years) as a vernacular tongue, the original meaning of the Latin liturgy remains unchanged. While this may not have been the original reason for the use of Latin, it is certainly a positive one!
Comment: Can you show that the Catholic church thinks this?
Comment: There may be a grain of truth in this, but Latin is certainly in current use. Not only is every Church document written in Latin (and then translated), it's even in use in [modern, ephemeral media](https://twitter.com/Pontifex_ln).
Comment: Welcome to Christianity! Welcome to the site. We are glad you decided to participate. This answer needs more support. It needs sources and citations, if necessary, to support what you are saying. Otherwise, it just looks like your opinion. Please add more to it to make a truly academic answer. Thank you. References: [Guidelines for writing effective answers](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/1920/guidelines-for-writing-effective-answers) and [What is a well-sourced, dispassionate answer?](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/886)
Answer: I would like to be more explicit on the content of the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia, which Ben mentions above. This document, written by Pope John XXIII in 1962, and subtitled "On the Promotion of the Study of Latin" expresses very clearly the position of Latin in the Church.
First of all, the Pope states that Latin as a unifying language was part of God's Providence:

And since in God's special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire — and that for so many centuries — it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See.3 Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.

Then, the Pope expresses the numerous benefits of Latin over other languages, like immutability, universality, favouring no nation, etc.
These paragraphs are very clear too:

Finally, the Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord. It is altogether fitting, therefore, that the language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular.
In addition, the Latin language "can be called truly catholic." It has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic See, the mother and teacher of all Churches, and must be esteemed "a treasure … of incomparable worth." It is a general passport to the proper understanding of the Christian writers of antiquity and the documents of the Church's teaching. It is also a most effective bond, binding the Church of today with that of the past and of the future in wonderful continuity.

Whether Latin Language is "holy" or not, that depends on the definition of holiness. But what is clear from the above is that for John XXIII Latin is a "noble, majestic" language, "truly Catholic", "a treasure … of incomparable worth", which has been "consecrated through constant use".
Answer: For interest's sake, I have heard several Catholic exorcists remark that prayers in Latin are much more powerful against Satan.  I do not know why that is (can anyone explain the reason for this?) but it seems that it would seem that while the prayers in any language can be effective (for all prayer is the movement of the heart towards God), the same prayers in Latin have much more efficacy.
Comment: Welcome to Christianity.SE! For a quick overview of what this site is all about, please take the [Site Tour](http://christianity.stackexchange.com/tour). This site does prefer answers that provide some support from the documents or doctrines of the denominations in question. For some tips on writing good answers, please see: [What makes a good supported answer?](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/692/what-makes-a-good-supported-answer) Meanwhile, I hope you'll spend some time browsing the questions and answers here!


What was the point of Marie's shoplifting

Question: It always seemed to me that Marie's shop lifting was an arc in Breaking Bad that the writers abandoned. So why was Marie's shop lifting arc abandoned after the third season or so? How did the stealing fit in the theme of things?
Comment: I think the right idiom is "scheme of things" :)
Comment: @Davidenko Isn't it the "correct idiom" instead of "right idiom"? The word "right" implies that they are both correct, but this one is better suited to the situation. The word "correct" implies that the original wording is wrong. Sorry :)
Comment: @Kevin Hahaha! It's ok Kevin ;)
Comment: People may fit it in, but I don't really think it fits in that well. Its given a lot of weightage which is didn't need. As a big BB fan, perhaps the only thing in the storyline which sort of went astray.
Answer: That story arc seemed like it was abandoned, but it did a lot to establish character relationships early in the series. When Skyler confronts Marie about her stealing, we see that Skyler is strongly against breaking the law, and that she encourages her sister to do the right thing by returning a stolen gift. We also see that Skyler can see through a lie when Marie denies any wrongdoing. This is interesting for a couple of reasons:

Walt is apparently a much better liar than Marie, as he's able to hide his crimes from Skyler for a lot longer.
The relationship between the sisters is reversed by the end of the series, when Hank and Marie find out about crimes commited by Walt and (eventually) Skyler.
Answer: To me the entire premise of Breaking Bad was that no one is entirely good or bad. The writers, knowing that the best characters are flawed characters has made each cast member have both positive and negative attributes. Analysis of the entire cast shows their dichotomous nature:

Walt - The mild mannered school teacher who becomes a drug lord
Jesse - The drug addict with a conscience
Hank - The experienced cop who survives (for a great while)by pure luck
Skyler - The loving wife and mother who has an affair

Marie needs to have another side. She seems like a stepford wife on the surface with everything going perfect. Her shoplifting was added to even out her perfect nature.
Answer: the shoplifting arc wasn't abandoned, (its mentioned that she was seeing a shrink about it by Hank, which would explain it's absence for a while) but in Season 4 episode, Open House, Marie began shoplifting again (most likely a subliminal cry for help due to Hank's verbal abuse while he was bedridden and collecting "minerals").  after she was arrested for trying to steal from an open house, she was bailed out by Hank's cop buddy Tim. Tim then asked for a favor in return, for Hank to look at a case Tim was working on, which was the homicide of Gale Boetticher. Which, of course, had major consequences. so if Marie wasn't a shoplifter, Hank would have never discovered Gus' secret, and Hank wouldn't ever have seen Gale's Walt Whitman quote in his lab notes, and made the connection to Walter in season 5.
Answer: I think the whole shoplifting arc had a lot to do with Hank. The moment Marie started it al her relationship with Hank was not good at all. Marie tried her best too fix it but Hank had is own troubles about going to Juarez if I recall correctly.
After that it stoppped for a while, but when Hank gets in recovery after he gets shot. Mariage problems started up again. Hank won't talk too Marie. And when Marie couldn't take it anymore she started imposing as someone else and going to open houses. And eventually stealing stuff again.
Answer: I don't think the shop lifting theme was abandoned in the series but they have put it to an end. Here's my interpretation.
Initially, Marie was shown to us that she shop lifts for fun and no profit. But when Skyler finds out about that, as mentioned in Bill the Lizard's answer, Skyler was completely against shop lifting and gives lecture and goes hard on Marie to stop doing it.
It's been a long time but I definitely remember Hank makes her to visit a shrink to deal with her problems like shop lifting. After that, there were no scenes regarding Marie's shop lifting for so many episodes, But when Hank is paralyzed from waist down, Marie starts stealing again few expensive antiques or other objects, posing as different persons but this time it's for profit or money because guilt consumed her because she's taking her sister's money for Hank's treatment.
While stealing, she gets caught and was taken to prison and we were shown that Marie cries and realizes her mistake. For me it makes perfect sense that No person like Marie would again do the same mistakes like stealing after going through a lot of humiliation and also putting a dignified officer like Frank in the spot for her release from prison.
Comment: Stealing a picture clearly isn't for profit. It seems more likely to me that she is falling into her old bad habits due to stress similar to Jesse's various relapses.


Reaper Post Production

Question: Do you guys know how to snap fades on one region in relation to another region on a seperate track, aligning the two for a precise cross fade? Snapping length of regions compared to other tracks, though a little fimicky, works fine, but quick accurate fade snapping isn't working for me. I enjoyed this function on ProTools and Sony's Acid. I haven't found a solution pop up on the Cockos forum yet.
Answer: I'm not really in on Reaper, but I've noticed that Macprovideo.com has been putting out a bunch of series on that and they're pretty cheap. I don't think it's mac specific, they've just combined with askvideo.com for stuff. Wish I could help with the actual issue, but if you're a Reaper user, figured you'd want to know.
Answer: REAPER user here. As far as I know REAPER doesn't have this function, unfortunately. Create a request on the forum and they might create it for you though! I know I'd use it too!

Reaper Post Production


Laptop has one bad and one good graphics card

Question: Will the system work on a laptop with a bad graphics card? Windows 7 Home Basic operates normally if you do not install the video card driver. The integrated card does not work and the second is fine.
Answer: The system should detect the second graphics card, though you may need to disable the first (depending on how it's detected and why it's broken). Not sure which cards you have, but you might need to install a proprietary driver to improve performance after the original install.
You can test the OS without installing by following the install directions, booting from the USB or CD, and following "Try elementary" rather than "Install". It will boot into the OS for you to test without committing anything to hard drive.


Hollow planet with another planet inside it

Question: I was wondering what would happen if there was a planet with a "shell" of stone entirely surrounding it (not connected, just held in place by gravity), with a few holes all the way through the outer shell, and two civilizations - one on the outside, and one on the inside. Would this be feasible? Would the outer shell need to be made of a specific material for it to work? Besides the fact that the outer civilization would likely suffer from droughts (as all the water flows into the interior), what consequences could this have on the two civilizations?
Comment: Unless the exterior is man made with a special material, it will collapse very quickly.

The interior would be very dark.

Depending on the distance between layers, the outer layer could be without an atmosphere, or in the outer parts of it.

It is unlikely that water would ever fall on the outer layer. Once it falls, it become trapped under.
Comment: There's a similar concept called a 'Shellworld' in Iain M Banks' excellent novel 'Matter' - these are artificial planet sized objects made of concentric, hollow spheres, supported by lots of huge, radiating columns. I think the example in the book has something like 1000km between layers. Here's more info: http://theculture.wikia.com/wiki/Shellworld
Comment: This is not unlike Midgar from FF7 a city underneath a large raised plate with another city. Although both of the layers have humans and related infrastructure (farming is bad on the lower level due to no sun light) so a good bit of your question will be based on what lives on each layer.
Comment: Are the two connected? Do the outworlders live on the outside or inside of their world? Is the outer shell completely solid so that the inner world is in constant darkness?
Comment: Strata from Torin's Passage is another example.  But that game mostly ignores the physics of it.
Answer: This sounds very much like a naturally-occurring Dyson Sphere that you're describing, albeit around a planet rather than a star.
Such a structure would not be able to form naturally at the birth of the planet, as planet formation pretty much consists of a bunch of stuff smashing together until it all smooshes (that's a technical term!) itself into one big ball. The only way to wrap a "core" with a "shell" would be if the shell formed entirely at one instant in time, otherwise the pieces would simply be pulled down to the core as it started to form, and would never have the time to form a shell.
The other option would be erosion, underground water eating away at the subsurface material to form a ginormous cavern that eventually encompasses the entirety of the underground. However, this, too, is so unlikely as to be implausible beyond belief; among other problems, where would the eroded material go? You'd have to put it somewhere, and unlike the water itself which could evaporate and find itself back up on the surface, the only direction it can go is down. You'll also quickly end up with caverns that simply wind their way down, down, down, down, and while they might link up with others the water's no longer eating away on the stuff that's still hanging out up because, of course, water flows downward.
Even if you did somehow manage to create this structure, it would be incredibly unstable -- one good break of a piece of the outer shell (caused e.g. by erosion weakening the integrity of the shell until it just breaks under its own weight) and now you have an unstable mass that will simply crash down to the core, break up, and now you're back to a solid planet.
And, of course, even without the aforementioned issues, even a small amount of tidal forces exerted on the planet would "wobble" the shell until it crashed down into the core. (EDIT: To say nothing of the sheer devastation should a meteor of even moderate size impact the shell!)
If we put aside such questions, though, and assume that we could have it (artificially-created by an advanced civilization, magic, etc.), then the effects depend largely on its structure.
For example, the surface might be quite dry, as you suggest, if there are enough holes to drain the water but not enough for ample circulation to bring water vapor back up to form clouds and rain. Or, if you've got ample air circulation between surface and subsurface, you could have plenty of moisture up top with ample rains for crops and such to thrive; this wouldn't even require the whole thing to be swiss cheese either, just a few, say, lake-sized holes. You could even help the surface out by having the shell be thick enough to support a few lakes of its own; not to mention that mountaintop glaciers can feed rivers that further add to the surface's water availability.
The lower layer would likely be a dark place, though if you have the circulation to keep the surface non-drought then it would most likely not be the damp and dank environment you see in caves. If you have lake-sized holes on the surface, you'd have lake-sized patches of ground in the underground where they'd get enough sunlight to grow crops; otherwise they'd be reliant on non-photosynthesizing food sources, such as fungus and many types of "slime" (generally algae). (Note that these lake-sized oases of sunlight wouldn't be directly below the holes unless they were precisely on the equator, and even those would of course move around with the seasons -- and in fact this movement might make all but the tiniest fraction of the space worthless for all but the fastest-producing light-dependent crops.) Given enough space between the subsurface's ground and the ceiling, they'd have their own weather patterns as well; with enough and large enough holes in the shell, the would be influenced by (and influence in turn) the surface's weather as well.
The most likely consequence is that you'd have two wildly different civilizations. The surface dwellers would likely view the "underworld" as a dark, scary, foodless desert, while the subsurface dwellers would likely view the surface as a blindingly hot wasteland -- neither would find much recognizable food in the other civilization's demesne, and both would find the other's climate intolerable to their senses in almost every aspect. I'd expect this to feed into rampant distrust of one's opposite civilization, and most likely there'd be wild rumors about the "barbaric" practices of the other; with two civilizations so wildly different, these rumors would likely be grounded in some element of truth, albeit embellished to varying degrees. (This assumes they're even aware of each other and have any sort of interaction at all, which may not be the case -- the vast physical gulf might be enough to keep the two from ever knowing about each other, at least until someone finally figures out how to make a rope long enough that won't snap under its own weight...)
Comment: Thanks. (And, yes, I was thinking of it having high ventilation.)
Answer: Apart from the problems of formation and the problems of mechanical stability already mentioned by others, there's also the problem that gravitation cannot preserve that situation.
If the sphere were perfectly symmetric, then the sphere would neither feel a net gravitation from the planet, nor the other way round. Of course the shell would feel the planet's gravitation as stresses, but those would not affect the movement. The planet would not even notice the sphere.
If the shell were absolutely tight, one might speculate that the air is denser in the inside of the shell than on the outside, and thus the atmosphere in between would keep the two spheres concentric (since air pressure gets less with height, whenever one side of the shell gets closer to the planet, it gets larger pressure and thus gets pushed back; I admit I didn't calculate whether this really works out that way). However since your shell has holes, any difference between the inside and outside air would quickly equilibrate.
One thing that might work in theory is if the outer shell is superconducting, and is held in place by the magnetic field of the inner planet. However you'd have to assume that there's a material that's superconducting at the planet's temperature. Also, a shell out of such a material would probably not happen naturally; it therefore would need to be a constructed object.
Comment: That's a fascinating idea that the air pressure might stabilise the otherwise unstable configuration. Even with holes in the shell that sounds plausible - the pressure difference between inside and outside the shell will be greater when the shell is at lower altitude.
Comment: Hmm, I've no evidence but my suspicion is that air pressure would help dampen the effects but would not be enough to stabilize by itself. You would need something to actively stabalize the outer shell.
Comment: @TimB I can't guess whether the air pressure difference across the thickness of the shell will be enough to keep it stable, so I've [taken it to the experts](http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/139144/stability-of-planet-enclosing-shell-supported-by-atmosphere).
Answer: (I am assuming you are asking this because you are interested in how something like this could exist within physics similar to what we have in our world, rather than an imaginary universe.)
I don't think there's any way that would just happen, in the physics of our own world, anyway. It's not a stable form that would be held in place by gravity, as you say. It would need astronomically powerful technology or magic to create it and hold it together. No sphere of solid matter the size of a planet would just hang steadily above a lower one without being insanely strong or somehow floating... maybe there's a massive magnetic field from the core and the outer shell is mostly magnetic metal suspended somehow - but this seems astronomically unlikely to me, unless the physics of this world are very very different from ours, or some amazing magic or technology explains it. Not that authors haven't written about such worlds in fantasy or extreme sci fi: see Ring World, for example.
The problem you mention with droughts on the outer shell sounds much less likely to be an issue than other concerns, and could be easily avoided by the creators if they so chose, via ridges around most or all of the holes, for instance. Also, depending on what the atmosphere was like and the altitudes involved, evaporation could bring water out to the outer layer via rain. But if the force keeping the outer shell suspended also acts on water, then water too would tend to just pool in a floating layer rather than falling down to the inner sphere. Unless the force is magnetic as so doesn't act on water.
Apart from the whole thing collapsing, the main effect on people living in such a situation that I see, is that the lower world would be extremely dark and so probably have a hard time growing earthlike plants. But any magic or tech or other-universe effects that explain the hovering shell, could more plausibly explain away such conditions or problems.
Depending on how the forces work that keep the outer shell hanging there, I can also imagine that someone flying high enough off the surface of the lower shell, might tend to start falling up towards the inside of the outer shell - it might have a force pulling things up to it too, leading to a third environment. If that is the case, then someone might be able to hang-glide or parachute or baloon-ride into a hole and make it to the other side of the outer shell. If the shell suspending force is magnetic or doesn't work that way somehow, then people might be able to similarly travel down relatively easily.
Depending on how the forces act on the atmosphere, the air pressure might also tend to be massively greater on the bottom rather than the top. Consider that on Earth, the tops of the highest mountains have air so thin that it's barely possible to survive. The explanation for how the suspension force works would do well do consider what it does to the air.
There would probably be some really strong winds and weather patterns around the holes, especially on the outer shell. If oceans are draining into the holes, they would of course also cause periodic dumps of water into the atmosphere of the inner planet. Again, what happens to that water would depend a lot upon how the suspension forces and atmosphere work.
The astronomy and astrology of civilizations on the inner planet would of course be based on the layout and movements of the holes in the outer shell.
Answer: A natural system by which a planet is enclosed in a shell seem possible, but very unlikely. That means that there are millions of them in the universe!
Consider a planet with many moons at the same mean orbital altitude but differing orbital planes. Collisions could cause a natural Kessler syndrome. One could postulate a world where the debris coalesced, especially if it is relatively on the outside edge of the habitual zone and there are many icy volatiles present. Remember, water expands as it freezes.
Now, how did the original moons come about? Perhaps a gas giant is gravitationally cleaning out the Oort cloud. Thus, you would have a source for the moons and a source for more icy volatiles.
Comment: "...possible, but very unlikely. That means that there are millions of them in the universe!" MY kind of answer! +1
Comment: This is a really interesting idea but I don't think it is physically plausible. Note that the expansion when freezing water only applies when freezing *liquid* water, which you would never find in orbit. I don't know the probability of this happening naturally, but I would guess it is sufficiently low that there are zero occurrences in the visible universe...
Answer: The only real similar situation that comes to mind here is the planet saturn. It looks a bit like a sphere around a sphere, except that the outer sphere has 2 (big) holes, which make it look like a ring.

If you were to build something around a planet, you would have to start with a planet like saturn, then try to redesign the ring to be more in a shape that you like, and see how far you can push the change before it becomes unrealistic.
Just a note: I would expect you to be able to design a sphere big enough to build on, but you probably have to build something like a dome dome due to the lack of atmosphere.
Comment: Of course, Saturn's rings are mostly empty. [This page](http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/~randerson/Inreach%20Web%20Page/inreach/saturn.html "SAS Solar System Tour: Saturn") has a pretty good image of what they'd likely look like from the inside; scroll down to near the bottom of the page.
Answer: Maybe it's not natural, but created by an earlier civilization before the current occupents evolved.
Building on another idea posted in this thread, the inner could be the original planet and a "shield" was added around it.  That got covered in regotith over geologic time with nobody cleaning up; perhaps a downed moon added substantially to the material.  Primitve live spread to the newly available zone and it evolved into a whole new ecosystem.
Answer: There is a concept of a shellworld discussed in various places you can easily find on the internet. To address the question of "Would this be feasible?", my answer for shellworlds is that they are, but only for certain configurations. I went into the specific mathematics here:
http://gravitationalballoon.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-specific-stability-requirement-of.html
It would technically be possible for people to live on both the outside surface of a shellworld, as well as on the surface of the planet inside it. However, it's difficult to make this work with both levels still having an atmosphere (although I won't go so-far as to say impossible). It is impossible to make work with holes in the shell. The levitation of the shell is dependent on the air pressure underneath it, as well as the ability of the shell to hold the pressure barrier. You would need air locks to go from the outside to the inside.
The stability requirement isn't hard to satisfy, provided the planet is sufficiently large. However, the larger the planet, the harder it is to maintain a perfect pressure barrier over such a large surface. So pick your poison.


Why no bracha on the four cups of wine

Question: Most of the time when doing a mitzvah, we say a bracha on the performance of the mitzvah itself (eating matza, lighting hanukkah candles, etc). On seder night, one of the most famous mitzvot is drinking four cups of wine, yet we don't say a bracha on the mitzvah of four cups. We say a bracha ha'nehenin (Ashkenazim on all four cups, Sepharim on 1 and 3), but where is the bracha hamitzvah?
Comment: @AlBerko I think you're reading a word that isn't in there. The question is not limited to a mitzvah d'oraita. In fact, I deliberately made one of the examples I gave (Hanukkah candles) a d'rabanan. Eating maror is another very similar example of a d'rabanan on which we say a brachat hamitzvah. The Talmud's lashon is 'hayev' for the four cups, not 'tov'. Likewise the SA (OC 472), Mishnah Berurah, Rokeach (283), and many others make it clear that 4 cups is a mitzvah. (I'll also confess that I got this question from the Rokeach).
Comment: Are you looking for 'borei peri peri peri peri"?
Comment: You have clearly mistaken the 4 glasses for a Torah Mitzvah. It is not. See https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/937300/jewish/Chametz-UMatzah-Chapter-One.htm. Many good behaviors are referred to as "Mitzvahs" but they aren't. And we don't say Brochos on good behaviours. In general, when reading Rambam it's worth to check the actual Mitzvos first at the beginning of a chapter.
Comment: if so, you might want to rephrase the question, stressing that it is Derabanan and similar to Marror that oes have a special Brocho.
Answer: In haaros.com there is an article in which the Piskei Teshuvos is quoted as stating the blessing on the wine (borei pri hagofen) is indeed also a like bircas hamitzvos. He is talking there about kiddush – the same should apply to the other cups at the seder.

ובפסקי תשובות (מהדורת תשע"א סי' רפט אות ג): "ולמרות שכל הקידוש הוא
  ברכת בורא פרי הגפן, מכל מקום דינו כברכת המצוות".

So we do say a bracha on the mitzvah of four cups. It's borei pri hagofen!
Comment: Piskey Teshuvot seems to be dealing only with the kiddush during the daytime (שכל הקידוש הוא ברכת בורא פרי הגפן). The Shulchan Aruch Harav also quoted in that article seems to apply this also to the kiddush of night, but his reason (שלא תקנוהו חכמים בשביל הנאת האדם אלא בשביל שצריך לזכרהו על היין) might apply only to Shabbat where the wine is a fulfillment of זכור את יום השבת but not to Pesach where the wine is a separate rabbinic commandment
Answer: The answer provided by the Rokeach, from whom I must confess to having stolen the question (Rokeach 283), is that to say a bracha on a mitzvah it has to done at once. There is an interruption between the four cups so we can't say a bracha hamitzvah on it. That's also why we don't say a bracha on hallel at the seder. The Kol bo and the Abudraham also follow this approach.

למה אין אנו מברכין על ד' כוסות אקב"ו לשתות ד' כוסות. כמו על נר חנוכה שהוא מדרבנן. וגם אין מברכין על ההלל לגמור את ההלל דאמרינן בערכין שחייב בב' לילות אלא לפי שאינו עושה ביחד שכל הברכות דוקא כשעושין המצוה ביחד בלא הפסקה

Why no bracha on the four cups of wine


Is using a frying pan to boil water for pasta a good or a bad idea?

Question: I just found out how my girlfriend makes pasta: She uses a (non-stick) frying pan to boil the water. I told her she should use a cooking pan. When she asked why I did not have a response. After some internet searching I still have no plausible arguments, it just seems absurd.
Comment: She used my largest frying pan. This one can hold more than enough water to cook pasta.
Answer: If you're making a small enough quantity of pasta for it to totally fit in the pan like that, it's fine. The idea that you need several quarts of water, several times the volume of the pasta, is a bit of a myth.
All you really need is enough water so that once the pasta is cooked and fully expanded, it's still covered. So depending on your appetite and the size of the pan, this might work for one or two servings, but not a full meal for many people.
The main concerns I'd have with cooking in a frying pan are:

since it's a broader surface, you'll lose water to evaporation more quickly, and risk ending up with too little water even if you started with enough - you might need to watch it more carefully than a big pot
the sides aren't tall enough to contain it for long if it starts to foam and boil over - again, you might need to watch carefully
it won't be able to hold enough to cook a very large quantity of pasta

If you avoid all those, I don't really see the problem!
Comment: I do this all the time. I can turn angel hair pasta into edibles in about five minutes. I put about a pint of water into the pan, turn it to high, and boil another pint in the electric kettle. They boil in about a minute, since I can use the larger burner. It's plenty for a single serving of long, thin noodles. Perfect for quick comfort food.
Comment: Your answer is a good one . When you address the surface to volume ratio with respect to evaporation, you could add that regulate the salt concentration gets way difficult. Risk is to get a too salty pasta.


Catapult + Immovable Rod

Question: What happens if you (try to) cast Catapult on an immovable rod? Which ability/effect trumps the other?
Answer: If the Immovable Rod is not fixed in place, worn or carried, Catapult will fling it like any other object weighing 1 to 5 pounds. If the Immovable Rod is fixed in place, Catapult will fail.
The whole point of Immovable Rod is to be magically fixed in place and immovable (well, resisting up to 8,000lbs of force). If a 1st level Transmutation spell can overcome this, then the magical item would be pretty worthless.
Comment: I agree magic interactions are not necessarily straightforward, but Catapult does not do what Unseen Servant can do. Unseen Servant can work around the Immovable Rod by pressing the button. Catapult targets the entire object, and not the button selectively. In this case, it is relatively straightforward. If you want to use Catapult on a fixed Immovable Rod, use Unseen Servant to push the button, then Catapult to launch it.
Comment: But is the rod only resistant to mundane, physical force? It has already been established elsewhere that Unseen Servant (a first level conjuration spell) could overcome the rod by pushing the button, moving the rod, and pushing the button again, so that argument holds no water. Additionally, the interaction of different types of magic is not always as straightforward as you imply.
Answer: Common sense says it won't work, but a literal interpretation of the rules actually says it would work.
Catapult says

Choose one object weighing 1 to 5 pounds within range that isn't being worn or carried. [...] the maximum weight of objects that you can target with this spell increases by 5 pounds [...] for each slot level above 1st.

This implies that Catapult only exerts enough force to lift objects of up to 45 pounds (if cast from a 9th level slot)
An immovable rod

can hold up to 8,000 pounds of weight.

So catapult doesn't appear to be strong enough to move the fixated rod.
But if you are a rules-lawyer who insists on a very literal interpretation of all rules, you could point out that the immovable rod only holds up to 8,000 pounds of weight, while the catapult spell refers to the weight of the object itself. While the immovable rod is able to exert a large amount of force, it itself doesn't have a mass over 5 pounds, so it should be affected by it.
If someone brings Newton into the discussion and claims that mass is nothing but the ability to resist accelerating forces, someone else will counter with bringing in Einstein and claiming that mass is how much it bends space (which it apparently doesn't) and then someone reasonable will stop that by pointing out that DnD magic doesn't adhere to real-world physics and trying to argument based on the assumption that it does will break the game completely, so don't even start going down that road.
A counter-argument could be that the Catapult spell also says:

stopping early if it impacts against a solid surface

which implies that the Catapult spell can not exert a large amount of force. But the rule-lawyer will again say that the immovable rod doesn't impact a solid surface, so this clause doesn't apply.
So the literal rules-as-written interpretation of what would happen would be that the immovable rod is moved up to 90 feet in a straight line and then stays in place there.
The rod would not deactivate, because it only does that when its weight capacity is exceeded, and we just established that this is not what's happening in this case (it doesn't deactivate if moved with a strength-check either).

So how should a DM rule in this case? I would recommend to invoke rule 0. When in doubt, do whatever makes for the better story. Is it a cool idea which advances the plot? Allow it. Does it break the game? Disallow it.
Comment: The rod text states that it doesn't move unless the button is pushed.  Another condition is to apply 8000+ pounds.  The rod wins.
Comment: ^ This. Since Catapult fails stops early if it impacts a solid surface, the immovable rod when turned on acts as a solid surface. Just because it's small doesn't make it any less solid. An anvil isn't very big, and catapult won't do anything to one that weighs 50 pounds.
Comment: @JPicasso Your comment should be an answer. It is better argued then he current best answer imo

Catapult + Immovable Rod


Where is the sutta that mentions the Five Niyamas?

Question: I am trying to find Buddha's word about Five Niyamas in Sutta. Or does it exist only in commentaries?
Comment: I've never seen it in the *suttas*. Only in the commentaries.
Comment: @fxam Are you asking this because you are wondering if all things are caused by karma? If so, then the Buddha did explicitly say that not everything is caused by karma in several Suttas, so even if you are reluctant to follow the commentaries, you can rest assured on this point.
Comment: @Bakmoon, thanks. I am aware that not everything is caused by karma :) Just curious about the origin of the Five Niyamas.
Answer: They are not the Buddha's words, I don't think. They are enumerated and defined in the Dhammasaṅgaṇī-aṭṭhakathā (Cittuppādakaṇḍo, Abyākatapadaṃ, Ahetukakusalavipāko, Vipākuddhārakathā):

Imasmiṃ pana ṭhāne pañcavidhaṃ niyāmaṃ nāma gaṇhiṃsu – bījaniyāmaṃ utuniyāmaṃ kammaniyāmaṃ dhammaniyāmaṃ cittaniyāmanti. Tattha kulatthagacchassa uttaraggabhāvo, dakkhiṇavalliyā dakkhiṇato rukkhapariharaṇaṃ, sūriyāvaṭṭapupphānaṃ sūriyābhimukhabhāvo, māluvalatāya rukkhābhimukhagamanameva, nāḷikerassa matthake chiddasabbhāvoti tesaṃ tesaṃ bījānaṃ taṃtaṃsadisaphaladānaṃ bījaniyāmo nāma. Tasmiṃ tasmiṃ samaye tesaṃ tesaṃ rukkhānaṃ ekappahāreneva pupphaphalapallavaggahaṇaṃ utuniyāmo nāma. Tihetukakammaṃ tihetukaduhetukāhetukavipākaṃ deti. Duhetukakammaṃ duhetukāhetukavipākaṃ deti, tihetukaṃ na detīti, evaṃ tassa tassa kammassa taṃtaṃsadisavipākadānameva kammaniyāmo nāma.
...
Bodhisattānaṃ pana paṭisandhiggahaṇe, mātukucchito nikkhamane, abhisambodhiyaṃ tathāgatassa dhammacakkappavattane, āyusaṅkhārassa ossajjane, parinibbāne ca dasasahassacakkavāḷakampanaṃ dhammaniyāmo nāma.
Ārammaṇena pana pasāde ghaṭṭite 'tvaṃ āvajjanaṃ nāma hohi…pe… tvaṃ javanaṃ nāma hohī'ti koci kattā vā kāretā vā natthi, attano attano pana dhammatāya eva ārammaṇena pasādassa ghaṭṭitakālato paṭṭhāya kiriyamanodhātucittaṃ bhavaṅgaṃ āvaṭṭeti, cakkhuviññāṇaṃ dassanakiccaṃ sādheti, vipākamanodhātu sampaṭicchanakiccaṃ sādheti, vipākamanoviññāṇadhātu santīraṇakiccaṃ sādheti, kiriyamanoviññāṇadhātu voṭṭhabbanakiccaṃ sādheti, javanaṃ ārammaṇarasaṃ anubhavatīti ayaṃ cittaniyāmo nāma. Ayaṃ idha adhippeto.
Comment: A translation might be useful :-)
Answer: According to Wiki article on niyamas these were written 5 to 18 CE. This is way after the Buddha's death. Also, according to wiki article, these are only commentaries. The article mentions which specific texts mentions them. They are quite a few.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niyama
This article seems to refer to the niyamas as something the buddha said:
http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/tp/The-Five-Niyamas.htm
Comment: @JayaravaAttwood O'Brien can't read Pāḷi, so doesn't know what she's talking about - seems quite a statement. Do you have any further evidence or articles about why we should be a little cautious about Barbara O'Brien. I'll be honest - the opinion seems a little harsh (passionate maybe). Thanks
Comment: For example utuniyāma does not mean "the natural law of non-living matter. " Utu means "season" anything that comes in regular cycles including the menstrual cycle - definitely *living* matter!. It is used by Buddhaghosa to show that karma produces timely results. Utuniyāma most certainly does not explain "the nature of heat and fire, soil and gasses, water and wind." Nor anything like it. O'Brien calls herself a "Buddhist expert". Far from it.
Comment: The O'Brien article just repeats the misrepresentations of Sayadaw and Rhys Davids. O'Brien can't read Pāḷi, so doesn't know what she's talking about.  The teaching is clearly *not* the words of the Buddha, since we know that it is the words of Buddhaghosa and his 13th century Burmese successors.
Comment: So let me rephrase. I've never seen any evidence of O'Brien knowing Pāḷi, there's certainly no knowledge of Pāḷi or the texts in question on display in this article. Her article simply uncritically repeats the mistranslations of Ledi Sayadaw's Niyāma Dīpani: http://mahajana.net/texts/kopia_lokalna/MANUAL04.html. This would seem to make O'Brien an unreliable guide to the niyāmas.
Answer: As the other's have said the pañcavidha niyāma or "five-fold inevitability" is a commentarial way of talking about dependent arising. That said the idea of a limitation (niyāma) is found in many places in the Pāḷi Canon and was also taken up by the Yoga tradition. The term often occurs alongside the term dhammatā 'natural' in relation to paṭiccasamuppāda - experiences that arise in dependence on conditions are dhammatā.
In 2012, I located all the Pāḷi texts which use this list and translated them. At present the draft is free and on my website: Source Texts for the
Five-fold Niyāma (pañcavidhaṃ niyāma). This document also includes mentions of dhammatā and niyāma in suttas. I hope to turn this material into a book at some stage.
There are two layers of commentary. Buddhaghosa, writing in about the 5th Century of the Common Era, and others writing in about the 13th Century, which was a very active time in Burma. Buddhaghosa is clearly most concerned with explaining karma in terms of bījaniyāma and utuniyāma, i.e. he uses analogies drawn from nature to explain why the effects of actions are appropriate and timely. The later Burmese commentators were more concerned with explaining how the cittavīthi or process of mental activity (aka cittaniyāma) worked using the same analogy.
My friend and Colleague Dhīvan (aka Dr Thomas Jones) has written about the modern history of the idea. It seems that Ledi Sayadaw and C. A. F. Rhys Davids reinterpreted the fivefold niyāma as "the five niyāmas" and made them into different "orders of conditionality". A theme that was taken up by Sangharakshita, the founder of the Triratna Buddhist Order. However this new formulation has almost nothing in common with the Pāḷi texts. Dhīvan's article for the Journal of Buddhist Ethics is The Five Niyāmas as Laws of Nature: an Assessment of Modern Western Interpretations of Theravāda Buddhist Doctrine. Dhivan has also written a more accessible account of the niyāmas on his blog: The 'Five Niyamas' and Natural Order.
I have also written some short essays about the term in other Indian darśanas, e.g.
 - Niyama in the Sāṅkhyakārikā and Buddhaghosa's Commentaries
 - Dharma-niyama in the Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya.


Can I install Tails on a WD My Passport?

Question: Can I install Tails on a WD My Passport? And also will the information save, or do i lose it upon shutdown?
Answer: It looks like it will probably work, WD USB HDDs appear as a USB drive which should allow the Tails installer to install onto it.
To start the Tails installer, you'll need a working Ubuntu, Debian or Mint based Linux distribution or another USB with an intermediary Tails device already installed. Follow the guide on the Tails website
The Tails installer will create a new partition table, effectively destroying all the data on the device (N.B. It would still be recoverable, just not accessible through normal means, not forensic destruction). It would then partition off enough space for the Tails OS to be installed onto, formatting it as FAT32 and leave the rest of the device as unpartitioned space which you can setup as encrypted persistent storage if you choose to.
As to if the information will be lost on shutdown, yes, the majority of it will (and should! eliminate the state, etc). You can however use and configure the aforementioned encrypted persistent storage to allow configurations, cryptographic key material or other files to be stored such that they will persist after a reboot. For more details, see the Tails documentation linked above.
Worth considering is that if this is a magnetic spinning platter (HDD) and not an ssd or flash memory you may find data access to be painfully slow. YMMV.
Answer: yup! I think you'll need to partition that hard drive first though, assuming you are storing other things on that My Passport drive.
Comment: The Tails installer will nuke any partitions already on the drive and partition it itself when it creates a persistent volume on it.


Exporting clips in Pro Tools and sound card conversion

Question: This may be a noob question but when exporting clips out of Pro Tools, say with fades and what not, does anyone know if the sound card is engaged at all?  The reason I ask is I have some sounds I've recorded using some pretty high-end conversion via firewire and I don't want those sounds degraded if I do some editing to the files when not hooked up to the firewire sound card and just editing on my laptop, and then exporting the clips/regions out.  Hope that makes sense and isn't too ridiculous a question to ask. thanks.
Answer: In short, no. The sound card is only engaged in the listening back of the audio. The processing of the sound is purely mathematical and done by your DAW much like a calculator.
Answer: I guess what you're asking is whether audio passes through an A/D or D/A converter and conversion when it's exported from a software e.g. Pro Tools. No it doesn't, because it's digital while it's stored (it's an audio file) and handled by the computer (it can be opened and edited with software programs), so there's no need to convert it at all or convert it in other ways than digitally (which can only induce digital calculation errors, but is not related to the sound cards converters. Practically digital-to-digital conversion is "lossless", depending on whether you do something that you shouldn't or not).
On another note, whether the sound card is "engaged at all" or "reserved" depends on how Pro Tools handles the audio card. It's possible that it's reserved at all times when Pro Tools is open and disconnecting the card while Pro Tools is open may cause Pro Tools to throw an error or crash. Respectively, it's possible that Pro Tools chooses when it accesses the sound card and when it doesn't, but doesn't reserve it all the time while running.
Comment: Great, thanks for that information, very helpful
Answer: You'll need a soundcard to work at 192kHz - Protools without any hardware will only run at 96kHz maximum (and obviously only some PT hardware options support 192kHz)


How do I read a textbook or monograph with good comprehension?

Question: I'm not a native English speaker but my reading ability is good. However, when it comes to academic books, I feel that my comprehension is slow. What strategies or methods can I use to help me improve that? I am in the field of computer science.
Comment: You might want to get some testing done with an educational psychologist to see what's slowing you down, and what coping strategies are recommended.
Comment: I doubt there is any need for a psychologist... Reading computer science textbooks is difficult for everyone. Probably what's slowing OP down is the vast amount of unfamiliar material, which is often not explained clearly.
Answer: You are not alone. Even highly educated native speakers find academic books hard. For the reasons for that see Michael Billig's book Learn to Write Badly (Cambridge University Press, 2013). It might amuse and comfort you.
Assuming you have to read a whole book, the strategy I suggest is to go through the thought process that the author should have gone through before putting pen to paper by asking yourself the following questions in the order given:

What single big question is the book trying to answer?
You would hope to find that stated very early on in the book, in an introduction or preface. Sometimes that may not be clear: that is not your fault.
What is the answer?
Sometimes considerate authors tell you the answer just after they have told you the question. Frequently authors are not considerate in that way. A good place to look is any chapter headed "Conclusions".
What in outline are the author's reasons for that answer?
Chapter headings might provide an answer to that, but sometimes you will have to dig a little deeper, skimming the beginnings and ends of the chapters themselves.

Don't be afraid of skimming the book to try to find the answers to these questions. Until you can answer them, simply ploughing through the book will be hard and unrewarding work.
 4. How does the author support each of the reasons given?
To answer that you will probably need to do a bit of ploughing, but don't expect to understand all the detail first time through. Keep constantly in your mind where the book is going, that is Questions 1-3 above.
When you have done all the above you can go into as much detail as you  need to master the author's whole approach.
Comment: A similar approach is presented in Paul Edwards' resource How to Read a Book (https://pne.people.si.umich.edu/PDF/howtoread.pdf). He further emphasizes what to write down and how to take useful notes.
Comment: I would even break that down further into determining what each chapter is trying to answer first and then building the larger picture of the book. If it's a paper it would be analogous to ask what each section is trying to say/prove. Keep breaking down the book/paper to the smallest part you understand and build up from there.
Comment: One piece of advice I heard was to read the first chapter and then the last chapter to get the « feel » then read all of it... The more you read - the better your vocabulary gets as well...
Answer: Many textbook publishers, authors, and editors go to a great amount of effort to create useful review questions and exercises, as well as designing the chapter outlines and summaries for readability.
If most of the issue is language-related, you could try a few of the following strategies:

"Pre-learn" vocabulary: Look at chapter summaries/vocabulary lists and looking up definitions of key words (in the book's glossary, ideally, or in a dictionary/online).
After reading chapter summaries, go to any examples in the text first, especially if they use code or math or process diagrams. Because these are less reliant on language, you may be able to get the overall idea quicker, then read about it.
You can check your comprehension, if you're not sure about it, by doing exercises (especially those with answers in the back of the book) or trying to answer review questions. (Your professor may have recommendations for places to find good questions with answers to check on this material.)
Talk with other students and professors about the material. If you write out answers to the book's review questions, others may be willing to look over and discuss what you wrote.

Even if you what you're reading isn't specially structured for learning, you may be able to do some of the above. On top of that:

Become more familiar with how researchers talk about the subject by listening to online talks and going to on-campus talks.
You could look for materials in your native language that cover similar material, to help you understand some of the shades of meaning in the concepts. For instance, you could search for your course text on Google Scholar, look at the list of works that cite it or the list of "related works" and see if any are in your native language.
Answer: Here are some additional ideas
*read the preface-the preface provides an overview of the entire text. It explains the purpose, intended audience, features of the text, and often a summary of each chapter. Students are in such a hurry to read the often don't know why they are reading and understanding the purpose helps.
*read the objectives/questions in each chapter-most academic texts have objectives/questions that are addressed in the chapter because explaining what you will teach before teaching it is a tenet of western instructional design. If you know what to expect in the chapter it is easy to follow the flow of the text. Again many students skip this to read without purpose.
This pattern of sharing objectives before details applies at the chapter level as objectives and at the chapter section level as main ideas for paragraphs. Academic writing is a most always deductive in nature.
*summarize-you can try to write a summary or try and explain the text to someone who is a non-academic. The best thing I ever did to understand my own studies was to explain to nonexperts. It really  forced me to see the point in simple language. If you can teach it to a novice then you know it.
Answer: At least in mathematics, but also partially in CS, there are quite visible "levels" of the book.

The general concept.
The basic ideas, the "what".
The details, the "how".

You might want to read a book multiple times, first gasping the "what". In mathematics there is a very clean separation in definitions and theorems (the "what") and proofs (the "how").