On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi Hugh,
>
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM, hugh thomas
> wrote:
>> Is it okay to go ahead and create
>> a page on the Sage wiki? (I guess the answers are yes and yes; if
>> not, please let me know!)
>
> When you have the URL of the wiki p
Hi Hugh,
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM, hugh thomas wrote:
> Is it okay to go ahead and create
> a page on the Sage wiki? (I guess the answers are yes and yes; if
> not, please let me know!)
When you have the URL of the wiki page for Sage Days 30, please
announce it in this list.
--
Regards
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 6:37 PM, hugh thomas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to announce a Sage Days which will be held at Acadia
> University in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada, for the week of May
> 9-May 13. The theme is combinatorics and number theory. The
> confirmed invited speakers are Flore
Hi,
I would like to announce a Sage Days which will be held at Acadia
University in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada, for the week of May
9-May 13. The theme is combinatorics and number theory. The
confirmed invited speakers are Florent Hivert, Franco Saliola, Anne
Schilling, and Nicolas Thiery.
On Friday, February 11, 2011, D. S. McNeil wrote:
> Well, someone asked for more posts.. not sure this is what he had in mind.
> ;-)
>
That was me. I think this has been a great discussion.
> Forgive my being a bear of little brain, but I've yet to grasp why
> defining the default gcd ratio
Hi again people!
Just wanted to know if the Levi-Civita tensor can be emulated by using this,
sage: G = SymmetricGroup(4)
sage: G([4,2,3,1]).sign()
-1
because I'm not sure if the notation used in the documentation is equivalent
to mine!
Thx.
Dox
--
To post to this group, send an email
On 2/11/11 4:47 PM, David Roe wrote:
It will sometimes happen that the rebase extension can't figure out
how to merge your patches, so then it should launch whatever 3-way
merge tool you have configured for mercurial to use (such as kdiff3 or
vimdiff), allowing you to supervise the merge process.
> It will sometimes happen that the rebase extension can't figure out
> how to merge your patches, so then it should launch whatever 3-way
> merge tool you have configured for mercurial to use (such as kdiff3 or
> vimdiff), allowing you to supervise the merge process. If you quit the
> merge withou
On 02/11/11 12:46 AM, Francois Bissey wrote:
On 10 February 2011 20:59, Francois Bissey
It appears this was a bug created by ECL which the ECL developer has
acknowledged
http://www.mail-archive.com/ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00671.html
and is fixed in CVS. So I think we should leave Ma
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 02:32:09AM +0800, D. S. McNeil wrote:
> My single most common use involves parts_in, though, and that's what doesn't
> work: Partitions(10, min_length=2, max_length=6, parts_in=[1,2,3,5])
> is a completely
> consistent set of constraints, but it silently drops two of them, a
Hi Nils,
On 11 Feb., 20:25, Nils Bruin wrote:
> I'd say: return 0 if a=b=0 and some random non-zero field element
> otherwise. That will teach people to write programs that depend on
> properly defined mathematical concepts rather than implementation
> details. (this is not a serious proposal for
Well, someone asked for more posts.. not sure this is what he had in mind. ;-)
Forgive my being a bear of little brain, but I've yet to grasp why
defining the default gcd rational function to be equal to 1 or (from
Simon) the lcm equal to 1 would be a _useful_ thing to do, independent
of the exis
On Feb 11, 9:56 am, Simon King wrote:
> Why an exception? If the elements are in a field that is not the
> fraction field of a PID, it is totally fine that gcd(a,b) returns 0 if
> one of a,b is zero, and returns 1 otherwise.
>
> I hope the whole discussion is not "painting a bike shed"...
I'd sa
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
wrote:
> However one should be careful: the kwarg
> options are *not* mutually exclusive as long as they are consistent
> (for some loose definition of consistent), and this feature is used in
> many places.
My single most common use involves par
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Robert!
>
> On 11 Feb., 17:30, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> Yep, that was the problem:http://sage.math.washington.edu:21100/ticket/8800/
>
> Great! It applies, *and* tests pass!
Yep. Let this be a lesson that the patchbot is still a work in
Hi guys!
Short question! Is there any function equivalent to the *Levi-Civita*
symbol?
I found *Eijk* in sympy... but seems to work only in 3-dimensions.
Thank you!
Dox
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sa
Hi Robert!
On 11 Feb., 17:30, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Yep, that was the problem:http://sage.math.washington.edu:21100/ticket/8800/
Great! It applies, *and* tests pass! So, the hope remains that some
kind category fan will have a look at it :)
Cheers,
Simon
--
To post to this group, send an e
Hi Andrey,
On 11 Feb., 15:59, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> > sage: (1/4).content(1/6)
> > 1/12
>
> Which agrees with what I have suggested before - gcd "analog" for
> fields should have some other name. After all, since any rational
> number is divisible by any non-zero, how can we pick "the great
On Feb 11, 8:10 am, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> On 02/11/11 09:34 AM, daly wrote:
>
> >> FWIW, I just noticed that Mathematica treats 2/1 as an integer and not
> >> as a rational.
>
No, 2/1 is not treated as an integer, it is converted to an integer
and its
history is lost. That is to say, GC
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Simon King wrote:
>> PS:
>>
>> Similarly, my patch for #10460 cleanly applies to a fresh
>> sage-4.6.2.alpha4, but the patchbot claims that it doesn't apply at
>> all.
>
> The patchbot is based on the lat
On 02/11/11 09:34 AM, daly wrote:
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 09:20 +, David Kirkby wrote:
On 10 February 2011 14:51, rjf wrote:
in maxima, gcd(1/4,1/6) is 1/12, lcm is 1/2
Since maxima immediately simplifies 2/1 to 2, there is no
distinction between gcd(2/1, ) and gcd(2, ...)
FWIW,
Very nice!
On Feb 11, 3:54 am, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Hopefully this is useful to someone - at least there were a couple of
> people in the IRC channel who didn't seem to know about this procedure
> when I mentioned it there some weeks ago... Maybe it should also be
> mentioned
> athttp://www.sage
I'd just like to add a big +1 for Tachyon in Sage. I'm using it in a
project to draw pictures of the Hopf fibration, which will eventually
be an animation. So more animation support would be nice :) For now
I'm gluing the pictures into an animation with png2theora.
Also, I couldn't figure out h
Hi,
So it seems there are 3 ways to go presently which are all somewhat
complementary:
1. Hershey font (probably the easiest for me to implement in the short term)
2. Have SAGE generate bitmaps containing text, which are either:
a) applied to 3-D objects in Tachyon via texture mapping
b) comp
On Feb 11, 4:25 am, koffie wrote:
> By the way, notice that inhttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3214
> they also added a function "content" which does the old gcd behaviour
> (i.e. similar to what simon describes).
>
> sage: (1/4).content(1/6)
> 1/12
>
Which agrees with what I have sugges
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:53:24AM -0800, Dox wrote:
> Nicalas... Your suggestion almost work, and in fact it is exactly what
> I'm talking about!
Cool :-)
> Specifically, my idea is to work with connections with values in a non-
> Abelian Lie algebra, SU(2), so there are 3 generators.
>
> There
Great, thanks a lot! I am looking forward to the updated version and
docs.
Another link you might want to look at is my patch improving some
documentation for Sage, which also tries to extend the support for
different projection options. Its at:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9855
S
Hello,
The sage-devel message archive doesn't seem to contain anything about
this, so I thought I'd share this with you all, just in case it's not
common knowledge among more seasoned developers than myself...
It is possible to use the "rebase" Mercurial extension to more easily
rebase mq patches
By the way, notice that in http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3214
they also added a function "content" which does the old gcd behaviour
(i.e. similar to what simon describes).
sage: (1/4).content(1/6)
1/12
On Feb 11, 12:15 pm, koffie wrote:
> First of all, sorry Simon to have misread you
First of all, sorry Simon to have misread you :(.
To awnser your question. I guess your algorithm makes sense when you
do it with fractions in the reduced form. I will do it only for prime
powers since the general case will follow from this.
Suppose we have two prime powers p^a and p^b with a,b po
On Feb 11, 10:49 am, Simon King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11 Feb., 09:56, Simon King wrote:
>
> > Well, I had the impression that a couple of people are in favour of
> > the following:
> > gcd(a/b,c/d) := gcd(a,c)/lcm(b,d)
> > lcm(a/b,c/d) := lcm(a,c)/gcd(b,d)
>
> It just occurs to me that I am inc
On Friday, February 11, 2011 4:52:09 AM UTC, robertwb wrote:
>
> If there was a simple API to map from a 3D point to a 2D point the
> rendered output, then it would be much easier to superimpose text
> ourselves.
+1
More importantly, for scientific publications people will invariably want to
u
Hi Tim,
I just opened #10771 for that purpose. Algorithm is proposed below.
On 11 Feb., 10:55, daly wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 01:49 -0800, Simon King wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > On 11 Feb., 09:56, Simon King wrote:
> > Does anyone have a better idea? Would it be a correct definition if
> > one in
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 01:49 -0800, Simon King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11 Feb., 09:56, Simon King wrote:
> > Well, I had the impression that a couple of people are in favour of
> > the following:
> > gcd(a/b,c/d) := gcd(a,c)/lcm(b,d)
> > lcm(a/b,c/d) := lcm(a,c)/gcd(b,d)
>
> It just occurs to me th
Hi,
On 11 Feb., 09:56, Simon King wrote:
> Well, I had the impression that a couple of people are in favour of
> the following:
> gcd(a/b,c/d) := gcd(a,c)/lcm(b,d)
> lcm(a/b,c/d) := lcm(a,c)/gcd(b,d)
It just occurs to me that I am incredibly stupid.
The definition above wouldn't work at all,
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 09:20 +, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 10 February 2011 14:51, rjf wrote:
> > in maxima, gcd(1/4,1/6) is 1/12, lcm is 1/2
> >
> > Since maxima immediately simplifies 2/1 to 2, there is no
> > distinction between gcd(2/1, ) and gcd(2, ...)
>
> FWIW, I just noticed tha
PS:
On 11 Feb., 09:56, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> On 11 Feb., 08:06, daly wrote:
>
> > ...
> > Can you suggest an algorithm to implement this?
> > Is there an agreed-upon answer (i.e., not 42?)
>
> Well, I had the impression that a couple of people are in favour of
> the following:
Or was
On 10 February 2011 14:51, rjf wrote:
> in maxima, gcd(1/4,1/6) is 1/12, lcm is 1/2
>
> Since maxima immediately simplifies 2/1 to 2, there is no
> distinction between gcd(2/1, ) and gcd(2, ...)
FWIW, I just noticed that Mathematica treats 2/1 as an integer and not
as a rational.
In[1]:
Hi Tim,
On 11 Feb., 08:06, daly wrote:
> ...
> Can you suggest an algorithm to implement this?
> Is there an agreed-upon answer (i.e., not 42?)
Well, I had the impression that a couple of people are in favour of
the following:
gcd(a/b,c/d) := gcd(a,c)/lcm(b,d)
lcm(a/b,c/d) := lcm(a,c)/gcd(b,d)
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Simon King wrote:
> PS:
>
> Similarly, my patch for #10460 cleanly applies to a fresh
> sage-4.6.2.alpha4, but the patchbot claims that it doesn't apply at
> all.
The patchbot is based on the latest release, not the latest alpha.
> Note that the patchbot did not
PS:
Similarly, my patch for #10460 cleanly applies to a fresh
sage-4.6.2.alpha4, but the patchbot claims that it doesn't apply at
all.
Note that the patchbot did not try again since about one month. Since
the patch did not change, or for what reason?
Cheers,
Simon
--
To post to this group, sen
41 matches
Mail list logo
