> > [...,..,x == (-1)^(1/3)*3^(1/3)]
> >
> >
> > I ran into this issue while demonstrating the usefulness of the solve
> > function in front of a class of students. That was quite 'fun' :-)
> >
> > Ted
> >
> It does seem strange that the answer that looked like it should be real is
> actually not
Jacob wrote:
> It does seem strange that the answer that looked like it should be real is
> actually not. If you have sage evaluate the first value in the returned
> answers you see that despite its appearance it is the pure real number that
> you desire.
>
> b[0].right().n()
>
> you get
> -1.44
> So why is solve placing parentheses around the 3rd root it returns if
> it evaluates into an imaginary value?
>
> [...,..,x == (-1)^(1/3)*3^(1/3)]
"around the 3rd root" should be "around the -1 in the 3rd root"
Ted
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, s
On Jan 23, 2008 9:19 PM, Ted Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...,..,x == (-1)^(1/3)*3^(1/3)]
>
>
> I ran into this issue while demonstrating the usefulness of the solve
> function in front of a class of students. That was quite 'fun' :-)
>
> Ted
>
It does seem strange that the answer that l
Jason Grout wrote:
> kcrisman wrote:
>> I'm sorry, I didn't read the ticket on this.
>>
>> This is pretty great - thanks for the work! Amazing what is possible
>> to do. I assume by the fact that you gave the variable that name that
>> it would be possible at some later point to amend the code
Hi, all,
In 2.10 (on 10.4.11), I notice that "readline" is behaving badly:
If I "^R" and search for a string, and find it, and then either use
"^A" or "E" to move to the beginning or end of the found line, I end
up with the cursor at the right margin of my Terminal window, and on
the line
William wrote:
> Until a month ago (-1)^(1/3) would have given -1. This is the default
> behavior dictated by Maxima. Then Paul Zimmerman complained
> (with a great argument) that this was stupid, and Mike Hansen changed
> the default Maxima behavior to what we currently have. He did
> this by
kcrisman wrote:
> I'm sorry, I didn't read the ticket on this.
>
> This is pretty great - thanks for the work! Amazing what is possible
> to do. I assume by the fact that you gave the variable that name that
> it would be possible at some later point to amend the code to allow
> checking for o
kcrisman wrote:
>But what Ted really wanted was just the real cube root of -1.
What I wanted was where the graph crossed the x axis as shown in the plot :-)
Ted
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscri
On Jan 23, 2008 5:50 PM, kcrisman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 23, 8:26 pm, "Ted Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mike wrote:
> > > It is due to the fact that ^ has a higher precedence than - in Python.
> > > n(-1^(1/3)) is the same as n((-1^(1/3))).
> >
> > Okay, here is how I r
On Jan 23, 8:26 pm, "Ted Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike wrote:
> > It is due to the fact that ^ has a higher precedence than - in Python.
> > n(-1^(1/3)) is the same as n((-1^(1/3))).
>
> Okay, here is how I ran into this:
>
>https://sage.ssu.portsmouth.oh.us:9000/home/pub/21/
>
>
On Jan 23, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Ted Kosan wrote:
>
> Mike wrote:
>
>> It is due to the fact that ^ has a higher precedence than - in
>> Python.
>> n(-1^(1/3)) is the same as n((-1^(1/3))).
>
> Okay, here is how I ran into this:
>
> https://sage.ssu.portsmouth.oh.us:9000/home/pub/21/
>
> What
I'm sorry, I didn't read the ticket on this.
This is pretty great - thanks for the work! Amazing what is possible
to do. I assume by the fact that you gave the variable that name that
it would be possible at some later point to amend the code to allow
checking for other extra_property possibil
Mike wrote:
> It is due to the fact that ^ has a higher precedence than - in Python.
> n(-1^(1/3)) is the same as n((-1^(1/3))).
Okay, here is how I ran into this:
https://sage.ssu.portsmouth.oh.us:9000/home/pub/21/
What I expected to get was -1.44224957030741. Which result should it prod
It is due to the fact that ^ has a higher precedence than - in Python.
n(-1^(1/3)) is the same as n((-1^(1/3))).
--Mike
On Jan 23, 2008 5:04 PM, Ted Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on why the following 2 code samples give
> different results?:
>
> #SAGE Version
Does anyone have any thoughts on why the following 2 code samples give
different results?:
#SAGE Version 2.10, Release Date: 2008-01-18
sage: n(-1^(1/3))
-1.00
sage: n((-1)^(1/3))
0.500 + 0.866025403784439*I
The only difference between them is that parentheses have bee
On Jan 23, 10:15 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dortmund.de> wrote:
> On Jan 23, 10:04 pm, Kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Kate,
>
> this is now #1898. You can expect a patch for this in the next hour or
> two.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
Hi Kate,
there is now a patch up at #1898. Could y
William,
On Jan 23, 7:42 pm, "bill.p" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, William, that's great!
Only trouble is it won't print!
It just omits the plot
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
Dear Sage supporters,
the following works:
sage: R=QQ['x,y']
sage: 1/R('x+y')
1/(x + y)
but the following doesn't:
sage: F=Frac(R)
sage: F('1/(x+y)')
Why?
So far, i was in the belief that F(some_string) would return a
reasonable interpretation of some_string in F, provided it exists.
Yours
kcrisman,
> The best possible world might be something like
> show(graphs(n,size==3))
If you look at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/1869
again, you'll see that as of sage 2.10.1 (as long as the patch gets a
review before 2.10.1 comes out...), you'll be able to do things like
sage:
On Jan 23, 7:49 pm, "Yi Qiang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can comment on the python-gnutls issue. The problem is that the API
> for gnutls has changed and is NOT backwards compatible with the
> previous releases. Hence, python-gnutls will not work since it is
> simply a package that wraps th
On Jan 23, 10:04 pm, Kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Sage 2.10 fails one test on ia64-Linux:
>
> sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/polynomial/
> polynomial_element.pyx**
> File "polynomial_element.pyx", line 266
Michael,
Sage 2.10 fails one test on ia64-Linux:
sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/polynomial/
polynomial_element.pyx**
File "polynomial_element.pyx", line 2669:
sage: p.roots(ring=CIF)
Expected:
[([-1.4142135623730952
Bill wrote:
> var('a');var('b')
You can also declare multiple symbolic variables using one var
function like this:
var('a,b,c,d,e,f')
or like this:
var('a b c d e f')
Ted
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegr
Thanks, William, that's great!
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
I can comment on the python-gnutls issue. The problem is that the API
for gnutls has changed and is NOT backwards compatible with the
previous releases. Hence, python-gnutls will not work since it is
simply a package that wraps the gnutls library and those wrappings
were automatically generated by
I'm probably trying to do something stupid here, but I'm interested
in the expression sin(a)+sin(b)+sin(c) where a,b,c are the angles of
a triangle, i.e. c=pi-a-b. This of course can be simplified to
sin(a)+sin(b)+sin(a+b).
I thought it might be interesting to plot this and so I entered:
var('a')
I remember a discussion here about this, but couldn't find it again.
I think it's useful to have a couple different ways to do "clickable"
Sage on Mac, so here's another way to do something like steps 3-6,
with a few remarks interspersed. This is also all possible with the
Property List Editor, b
On Jan 23, 2008 2:39 AM, David R. Kohel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi John and William,
>
> In my last message, it appears that the non-ASCII characters where
> remapped to ASCII so that you may have to try cutting say from the
> original text on the web page to recreate the problem.
>
> import
On Jan 23, 2008 5:33 AM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 23, 2:29 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 22, 2008 11:48 PM, Paul Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I guess 'long' is based on GMP too, does it make sense to have two
> > > concur
On Jan 23, 2:29 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2008 11:48 PM, Paul Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I guess 'long' is based on GMP too, does it make sense to have two
> > concurrent
> > interfaces to GMP integers?
> > Paul Zimmermann
>
> long is _not_ ba
On Jan 23, 2008 4:24 AM, Gorka Merino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Good morning Dr. Stein, I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask
> for but i had some problems t get into the forums,
>
> I'm trying to install SAGE for Windows from the
> http://sagemath.org/SAGEbin/microsoft_windo
On Jan 22, 2008 11:48 PM, Paul Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> thank you for your explanations.
>
> > The 'int' (and its bignum counterpart, 'long') are native Python
> > types. As far as I know, we don't modify Python at all; removing
> > 'int' would be major surgery, and we're not going
On Jan 22, 2:17 pm, Carl Witty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 'Integer' is a Sage type. This means it has lots of useful
> mathematical convenience methods (like .is_square()), it participates
> in the coercion model, etc. Also, 'Integer' is implemented with GMP,
> and 'long' is not, so 'Intege
On Jan 23, 11:06 am, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Michael
>
> On Jan 23, 1:30 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> dortmund.de> wrote:
> > On Jan 22, 11:34 pm, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I mean: saying "./sage -notebook", i got a lot of error messages and
> > >
Dear Michael
On Jan 23, 1:30 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dortmund.de> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 11:34 pm, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I mean: saying "./sage -notebook", i got a lot of error messages and
> > eventually an "Unhandled SIGSEGV".
>
> I can reproduce it.
Slightly relievin
36 matches
Mail list logo
