[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Jun 12, 2007, at 11:31 AM, Michel wrote: > Ideally I should be the element x in ZZ[x]/(x^2+1) (and not QQ[x]/ > (x^2+1)). I agree, but currently we have much better support for number fields than orders or quotient rings. Hopefully that'll change (r.e. David Roe's SEP). > Likewise zeta[n

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread Michel
Ideally I should be the element x in ZZ[x]/(x^2+1) (and not QQ[x]/ (x^2+1)). Likewise zeta[n] could be the element y in ZZ[y]/(y^n-1). These rings should have automatic coercions to many other rings (including of course the symbolic ring). Michel On Jun 12, 8:04 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PR

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: > "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or >>> perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a >

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread Nick Alexander
"William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or >> perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a >> fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread William Stein
On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or > perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a > fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the symbolic > ring, etc. as needed. With the curren

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-12 Thread Robert Bradshaw
I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the symbolic ring, etc. as needed. This doesn't resolve your second issue though, I think William's simpi

[sage-devel] Re: Complex numers in symbolic expressions.

2007-06-11 Thread William Stein
On 6/11/07, Joshua Kantor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I noticed that dealing with complex numbers doesn't work as well as I > would expect. Simple example, how do you get sage/maxima to perform > complex division > > sage: 1/(1+I) > > output 1/(1+I) > > I couldn't find any way to simplify other