Hi,
I've been going through my integral test suite and I've
ran across one integral that maxima doesn't like at all,
but FriCAS doesn't have a problem with.
var('x')
f = sin(x)/x
g = f.integrate(x)
g isn't integrated or recognized as a particular function.
However, if I do,
h = axiom.integrate(
On Dec 4, 5:28 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi:
>
> A related question to the Sage+Tck/Tk issue:
>
> After installing the Tck/Tk development libraries and reinstalling
> Sage's Python, I installed Sage's PIL optional package.
> It compiled fine for the most part but the tkinte
On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:51 PM, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:47:22AM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote:
>> I don't have a whole lot of time, but I put some improvements up at
>> http://sagenb.org:8000/home/pub/94/ and included some timings there.
>> h6.eigenvalues() took 0.11 se
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:47:22AM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote:
>>> I don't have a whole lot of time, but I put some improvements up at
>>> http://sagenb.org:8000/home/pub/94/ and included s
Hi:
A related question to the Sage+Tck/Tk issue:
After installing the Tck/Tk development libraries and reinstalling
Sage's Python, I installed Sage's PIL optional package.
It compiled fine for the most part but the tkinter connection is missing
(it's a file called _imagingtk.so in site-packages/
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:47:22AM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote:
>> I don't have a whole lot of time, but I put some improvements up at
>> http://sagenb.org:8000/home/pub/94/ and included some timings there.
>> h6.e
Hi
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:55:37AM -0800, mabshoff wrote:
> Can you provide us with the examples that crash? We would certainly be
> interested in fixing them.
Yes, I will definitely send bug reports to sage-devel in future.
Le me understand a bit of what we are doing though so as to not
was
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:47:22AM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote:
> I don't have a whole lot of time, but I put some improvements up at
> http://sagenb.org:8000/home/pub/94/ and included some timings there.
> h6.eigenvalues() took 0.11 seconds to run on my machine. It looks
> like everything you'
On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:31 PM, pong wrote:
> Robert, thanks for clearing that up for me.
>
> However, I think it's still desirable to leave "unsorted" as an
> option, even though as you said now sorting doesn't take up the
> majority of the time. For example, it will be a waste of computing
> time
Robert, thanks for clearing that up for me.
However, I think it's still desirable to leave "unsorted" as an
option, even though as you said now sorting doesn't take up the
majority of the time. For example, it will be a waste of computing
time if divisors is followed by some operations that may s
On Dec 4, 2008, at 9:35 PM, pong wrote:
> In SAGE 3.2.1 , the docstring of divisors says:
>
> Definition: divisors(n)
> Docstring:
>
> Returns a list of all positive integer divisors
> of the nonzero integer n.
>
> A second parameter may be passed to surpress sorting
>
In SAGE 3.2.1 , the docstring of divisors says:
Definition: divisors(n)
Docstring:
Returns a list of all positive integer divisors
of the nonzero integer n.
A second parameter may be passed to surpress sorting
of the list (as ordering the list can be more tim
William Stein wrote:
>> Should we phase GSL out of numerical_integral too? Should we replace it
>> with the equivalent scipy call (which would make it massively shorter
>> and simpler)?
>
> Yes, it is very tempting to do so. One thing is that each function
> evaluation
> could in theory be mu
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>>>
Tim Lahey wrote:
>> Jason
> Is there an easy way to get the i
Tim Lahey wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> It would be better to call the numerical_integral function
>> that is already in Sage, which Josh Kantor wrote, which
>> is pretty sophisticated. It uses GSL and a C callback function.
>> Then improve the implementation
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Lahey wrote:
> Jason
Is there an easy way to get the integrand, variable and bounds out of the
integral? That way, if one has trie
On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
It would be better to call the numerical_integral function
that is already in Sage, which Josh Kantor wrote, which
is pretty sophisticated. It uses GSL and a C callback function.
Then improve the implementation of that function to also use
scip
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
>>
>> Tim Lahey wrote:
>>>
Jason
>>>
>>> Is there an easy way to get the integrand, variable and bounds out of the
>>> integral? That way, if one has tried to analyticall
On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Tim Lahey wrote:
Jason
Is there an easy way to get the integrand, variable and bounds out
of the
integral? That way, if one has tried to analytically evaluate it,
they
can pull it out and try numerically evaluating it easily. In fact, i
Tim Lahey wrote:
>
>> Jason
>
> Is there an easy way to get the integrand, variable and bounds out of the
> integral? That way, if one has tried to analytically evaluate it, they
> can pull it out and try numerically evaluating it easily. In fact, it
> probably could be done automatically.
>
s
On Dec 4, 2008, at 9:38 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Robert Dodier wrote:
On Dec 4, 2:04 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sage: f.n()
and get back a floating point number. This is surprisingly not
implemented in Sage, but it isn't.
(That's basically because Maxima itself doesn't s
Robert Dodier wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2:04 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> sage: f.n()
>>
>> and get back a floating point number. This is surprisingly not
>> implemented in Sage, but it isn't.
>> (That's basically because Maxima itself doesn't seem to have such
>> functionality.)
On Dec 4, 2:04 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sage: f.n()
>
> and get back a floating point number. This is surprisingly not
> implemented in Sage, but it isn't.
> (That's basically because Maxima itself doesn't seem to have such
> functionality.)
I'm guessing that f.n() just
On Dec 4, 2008, at 7:19 PM, Jeffrey Straszheim wrote:
Tim Lahey wrote:
Oh, thanks a lot. I'll look for it. I prefer applied math texts so I
definitely appreciate the recommendation.
I don't want mislead you. It is still a pure math text. Abstract
algebra, which is where you'll find covera
Tim Lahey wrote:
> Oh, thanks a lot. I'll look for it. I prefer applied math texts so I
> definitely appreciate the recommendation.
>
I don't want mislead you. It is still a pure math text. Abstract
algebra, which is where you'll find coverage of groups, rings, and
fields, is usually pretty fa
On Dec 4, 2008, at 7:45 AM, David Joyner wrote:
Looks like the Sage tutorial except it has a lot of exercises and
statistical
examples. There are also some cool dynamical systems examples.
I agree, that the tutorial at least needs more statisitcs.
I'm not how sure the new documentation sys
On Dec 4, 2008, at 5:32 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Dec 4, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Tim Lahey wrote:
Good to know. Is there a way for Sage to do a reset, along the lines
of a MATLAB clear or a Maple restart? That is, forgets all
expressions
and variables as if the session was brand new?
Yes
On Dec 4, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Tim Lahey wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 5:18 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> This is probably off topic, but you can always get any Sage global
>> variable you're used to by doing sage.all.varname. For example:
>>
>> sage: I = 5
>> sage: I
>> 5
>> sage: sage.all.I
>> I
On Dec 4, 2008, at 5:18 PM, William Stein wrote:
This is probably off topic, but you can always get any Sage global
variable you're used to by doing sage.all.varname. For example:
sage: I = 5
sage: I
5
sage: sage.all.I
I
Good to know. Is there a way for Sage to do a reset, along the lines
On Dec 4, 2008, at 5:13 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Tim Lahey wrote:
The only problem I see with this is that it doesn't free up the
original. One
reason for changing the symbolic I, is to be able to use it for other
variables.
Sure it does:
sage: _j = I
sage: _j.rename("_j")
sage: var("I")
I
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tim Lahey wrote:
>>
>> The only problem I see with this is that it doesn't free up the
>> original. One
>> reason for changing the symbolic I, is to be able to use it for other
>> variables.
>
>
> Sure it does:
>
> sage: _j
Tim Lahey wrote:
>
> The only problem I see with this is that it doesn't free up the
> original. One
> reason for changing the symbolic I, is to be able to use it for other
> variables.
Sure it does:
sage: _j = I
sage: _j.rename("_j")
sage: var("I")
I
sage: type(I)
sage: I^2
I^2
sage: type(
William Stein wrote:
>
> In case my response above was ambiguous, I'm very much in favor of their
> being a way to change how the symbolic I prints. Wait a minute, I just
> realized
> that I designed and imlemented a very nice way to do this sort of thing over
> THREE YEARS ago, but nobody ever
On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:50 PM, William Stein wrote:
In case my response above was ambiguous, I'm very much in favor of
their
being a way to change how the symbolic I prints. Wait a minute, I
just realized
that I designed and imlemented a very nice way to do this sort of
thing over
THREE YEA
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Alex Raichev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your help, Carl. Where did you find the documentation for
> the command number_field_elements_from_algebraics(c)?
I'm guessing Carl knew about that command since he implemented it.
Typing
sage: help(sage.rin
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Vijay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 4, 3:07 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Do you think it would be better if instead of
>>
>> sage: print integrate(integrate(f,y,x^3,x^0.5),y,0,1)
>> ... Is x positive or negative?
>>
>> one saw:
>> ... Is
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Tim Lahey wrote:
Hi,
Thanks. I was kind of hoping for something le
Thanks for your help, Carl. Where did you find the documentation for
the command number_field_elements_from_algebraics(c)?
Yes, i'd find it very useful to have ideal and variety
computations over QQbar implemented. I don't have the know-how or the
time at present to do this myself, but i am
On Dec 4, 3:07 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you think it would be better if instead of
>
> sage: print integrate(integrate(f,y,x^3,x^0.5),y,0,1)
> ... Is x positive or negative?
>
> one saw:
> ... Is x positive or negative? (Try using the assume command.)
I think the l
On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Tim Lahey wrote:
Hi,
Thanks. I was kind of hoping for something less drastic,
but that works. In Maple there is just a variable you can
set which controls things, so yo
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tim Lahey wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks. I was kind of hoping for something less drastic,
>> but that works. In Maple there is just a variable you can
>> set which controls things, so you can do it on a per script
>> basis.
>>
Dr. Stein: The assume() command worked.
Thanks.
Tim: Thanks for your reply, too.
I noticed that I was integrating wrt y twice after
I sent off the email, but the result was still the same
if you change the outermost integration to be wrt x.
Thanks
On Dec 4, 3:07 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROT
On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:09 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This may be a bug in Maxima, because it looks like it can do the
indefinite
integral. However, any integral that requires feedback from the
user during
the integration,
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This may be a bug in Maxima, because it looks like it can do the indefinite
> integral. However, any integral that requires feedback from the user during
> the integration,
> won't work from Sage. This has caused me problems
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Vijay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi: I am trying to evaluate a double integral (since I cannot put
> LaTeX, the 'S' below
> stands for the integral sign:)
>
> 1 sqrt(x)
>S S 4xy - y^3 dy dx
> 0 x^3
>
> This is what I put into
On Dec 4, 2008, at 3:57 PM, Vijay wrote:
Hi: I am trying to evaluate a double integral (since I cannot put
LaTeX, the 'S' below
stands for the integral sign:)
1 sqrt(x)
S S 4xy - y^3 dy dx
0 x^3
This is what I put into sage:
sage: var('x,y')
(x, y)
sage: f=
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Stan Schymanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I would like to evaluate a symbolic equation containing an integral
> numerically:
> ((integrate(250*cos(pi*x/180)^1.8 + 170.35,x,0,18)/a_v)(a_v=1)).n()
> does not work. Is there a way of doing this? The
Hi: I am trying to evaluate a double integral (since I cannot put
LaTeX, the 'S' below
stands for the integral sign:)
1 sqrt(x)
S S 4xy - y^3 dy dx
0 x^3
This is what I put into sage:
sage: var('x,y')
(x, y)
sage: f=4*x*y-y^3
sage: print f
Prof. William,
1. removing the file sage-flags-txt:
./sage
--
| Sage Version 3.2.1, Release Date: 2008-12-01 |
| Type notebook() for the GUI, and license() for information.|
-
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:39 AM, prof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello!
> I have installed SAGE from source files (sage-3.2.tar). Everything
> works ok!
> Then, I issued
>
> sage -upgrade
>
> and I have this screen (after upgrade to 3.2.1):
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/sage-3.2$ ./sage
> -
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:07 PM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:40 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:58 AM, mabshoff
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 11:56 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello!
I have installed SAGE from source files (sage-3.2.tar). Everything
works ok!
Then, I issued
sage -upgrade
and I have this screen (after upgrade to 3.2.1):
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/sage-3.2$ ./sage
--
| Sage Version 3
There is a bug when trying to create ideals in extension fields.
The following returns an error:
x = polygen(QQ)
K. = NumberField(x^2-7)
L. = K.extension(x^2-13)
L.ideal(b)
# TypeError: Unable to coerce -13/2*a + 13/2 to a rational
This has been tested on 3.2 and 2.8.1, both return exactly the
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:40 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:58 AM, mabshoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 11:56 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I wonder if this should be mentioned in install.tex somewhere?
>>
>> I d
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:16 AM, adrian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I got the same problem. In ubuntu amd 64 hardy, I got the following
> missing:
>
> pebs ssse3 pge clflush sep syscall vme tsc est vmx xtpr nx
> constant_tsc pat bts lm msr fpu fxsr tm pae arch_perfmon acpi cx8 mce
> de mca pse
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:58 AM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Dec 3, 11:56 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I wonder if this should be mentioned in install.tex somewhere?
>
> I don't see any reason. Getting some extension $FOO to work will
> greatly depend on the
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:52 PM, kcrisman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Weirdly, I cannot now reproduce the disappearing slider issue, even
>> though it was consistent a few days ago with 3.1.4+. If it crops up
>> again I will report back.
>>
>
> Okay, I can replicate this again - with a di
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:47 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
This requires good working knowledge of python style, which is even
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 3, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>
>>
>> This requires good working knowledge of python style, which is even
>> rarer than good working knowledge of English :).
>>
>> Of all the options, I think passing a
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:47 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>
>>> This requires good working knowledge of python style, which is even
>>> rarer than
Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:47 AM, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If anyone has the time to look at and discuss some of these issues
>> that will be much appreciated, and assist in the growth of using SAGE
>> to teach in this institute!
>
> I don't hav
Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:47 AM, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If anyone has the time to look at and discuss some of these issues
>> that will be much appreciated, and assist in the growth of using SAGE
>> to teach in this institute!
>
> I don't hav
adrian wrote:
> sage: limit(x*0,x=oo)
> 0
Looks right to me. Maybe you agree, I can't tell from your message.
> sage: limit(x*oo,x=0)
> 0
>
> This seems wrong to me; and probably the problem is that x*oo should
> not be allowed to begin with...
Seems wrong to me too. Since Sage calls Maxima to
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:29 AM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jason Grout wrote:
>> I agree with you that we could (and should?) do a lot to support
>> graphics as an integral part of calculations. I've spent some time
>> thinking about it. If we used TinyMCE or some other editor, I
On Dec 4, 2008, at 7:45 AM, David Joyner wrote:
Looks like the Sage tutorial except it has a lot of exercises and
statistical
examples. There are also some cool dynamical systems examples.
I agree, that the tutorial at least needs more statisitcs.
I'm not how sure the new documentation sys
Looks like the Sage tutorial except it has a lot of exercises and statistical
examples. There are also some cool dynamical systems examples.
I agree, that the tutorial at least needs more statisitcs.
I'm not how sure the new documentation system rest/sphynx handles graphics.
If graphics are no pr
On Dec 4, 1:47 am, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
Hi Jan,
> Someone is using SAGE in teaching a Quantum Mechanics course
> at the institute where I work, and we want to make sure we
> are starting off on the right foot.
Cool. Mike answered your other questions, so:
> 3. The c
Hi Jan,
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:47 AM, Jan Groenewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If anyone has the time to look at and discuss some of these issues
> that will be much appreciated, and assist in the growth of using SAGE
> to teach in this institute!
I don't have a whole lot of time, but I put
Hi
Someone is using SAGE in teaching a Quantum Mechanics course
at the institute where I work, and we want to make sure we
are starting off on the right foot.
All SAGE installs are 3.2 built from source.
All students have a local SAGE instance on a P4, 512M, Ubuntu box.
Some of the tests run ar
Jason Grout wrote:
> I agree with you that we could (and should?) do a lot to support
> graphics as an integral part of calculations. I've spent some time
> thinking about it. If we used TinyMCE or some other editor, I suppose
> we could have images in the input code. See
> http://tinymce.m
70 matches
Mail list logo
