Dear all,
I found some unexpected/inconsistent behavior when specializing a polynomial in
a tower of polynomial rings to a special value. Consider the case when the base
of the tower is QQ:
sage: K. = QQ[]
sage: R. = K[]
sage: f = x + t
sage: f1 = f.specialization({t: 1}); f1
x + 1
sage: f1.par
When launching QTerminal in an xrdp session in Lubuntu, running 'sage'
gives the following error
/bin/sage: line 242: /bin/sage-env: No such file or directory
Error setting environment variables by sourcing '/bin/sage-env';
possibly contact sage-devel (see http://groups.google.com/group/sage-deve
I have managed to get it working by putting a symbolic link to
/usr/share/sagemath/bin/sage-env to /bin/sage-env
It looks like the environment variables aren't picked up correctly for the
xrdp session and I don't understand their relationship well enough to
figure it out
On Thursday, December
On 12/16/20 3:27 PM, Linden Disney wrote:
Ok I've modified the code to plain sage to make it more useful and I've
copied it below. Given that it's hard to compare the determinants of the
raw matrices, as they are defined in terms of different variables, I
have found the z^2 coefficient in each
This is https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30888
On Thursday, December 17, 2020 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-8 Tyler Spilker wrote:
> I have managed to get it working by putting a symbolic link to
> /usr/share/sagemath/bin/sage-env to /bin/sage-env
>
> It looks like the environment variables aren't picked u
On 3/18/20 11:48 AM, Michael Jung wrote:
Dear fellow developers,
I've encountered a really strange result in Sage while using Maxima.
|
sage:f(x,y)=(x^2-y^2)/(x^2+y^2)^2
sage:integrate(integrate(abs(f(x,y)),x,0,1),y,0,1)
-1/4*pi
|||
This is really weird. At least, the result should be positiv
That does indeed seem simple. Here is an even shorter version that only
needs one matrix.
R = LaurentPolynomialRing(QQ, "p1, p2, p3, p4, Q0, Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, w, z")
p1, p2, p3, p4, Q0, Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, w, z = R.gens()
L = Matrix([[-p1, Q1, 0, 0, 0, -4*Q0/z, 0, 0, 0],
[Q1, p1-p2, Q2, 0,
> There is still a lot of room for improvement. SymPy could be tried first
> when integrating expressions containing an absolute value, for one. We
> already _fall back_ to giac/sympy if maxima throws an error; but when it
> simply returns garbage, the problem goes unnoticed.
>
Why do we use
