Hi.
This is a question about whether it is possible to manually input (or
modify) in sage an explicit rewriting system of an already inputed finitely
presented group.
Here is the preamble to the more explicit details for my question:
I am working in Sage with the fundamental group (call it G)
this is now https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22961
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 3:44:12 PM UTC+1, Peter Mueller wrote:
>
> The functions and their docs in codes.bounds.* still seem to be a mess (as
> they have been since many years now). Here a few findings from a recent
> attempt to use them in c
Thanks John.
On 8 May 2017 at 20:45, John H Palmieri wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Within Sage, you can get the appropriate command with
>
>
> sage: from sage.misc.latex_macros import sage_configurable_latex_macros
> sage: sage_configurable_latex_macros
> ['\\newcommand{\\Bold}[1]{\\mathbf{#1}}']
> sage:
Hi John,
Within Sage, you can get the appropriate command with
sage: from sage.misc.latex_macros import sage_configurable_latex_macros
sage: sage_configurable_latex_macros
['\\newcommand{\\Bold}[1]{\\mathbf{#1}}']
sage: print(sage_configurable_latex_macros[0])
\newcommand{\Bold}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}
In Sage 7.6:
sage: latex(QQ)
\Bold{Q}
but \Bold is not a standard LaTeX macro. However,
sage: show(QQ)
\newcommand{\Bold}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}\Bold{Q}
shows that the macro is defined somewhere in Sage itself.
Next, if I create a file mini.tex containing
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{sagetex}
Reinstall fixed problem now.
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 10:35:47 AM UTC-7, Curtis Bennett wrote:
>
> I am a new Sage user. In running the tutorial, the solve command would
> not work. Searching previous questions, I then installed the Command Line
> tools and removed the .sage file, but the sol
I am a new Sage user. In running the tutorial, the solve command would not
work. Searching previous questions, I then installed the Command Line
tools and removed the .sage file, but the solve command is still not
working. Here is the error traceback.
Traceback (most recent call la
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 8:30:32 AM UTC-7, Marcin Kostur wrote:
>
>
> Is it a bug or i do something wrong? ;-)
>
>
Both. Simplify punts to Maxima and elements of QQbar don't survive the
trip. The "_I" you get back isn't recognized as a square root of -1. To see
things go wrong more clearly:
sag
Hi all,
There is some strange behaviour:
- SR(QQbar(I)).variables() is empty
BUT
- SR(QQbar(I)).simplify().variables()
returns "_I" symbolic variable.
Is it a bug or i do something wrong? ;-)
the best
Marcin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro
Hi
The recent version should install, see:
https://github.com/K3D-tools/K3D-jupyter/issues/14
the best
mk
On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 3:05:43 PM UTC+2, HG wrote:
>
> Very strange the hooper-flatsurf_demo.ipynb works in sagemath (after
> installing it with sage -python setup.py install) but I
The functions and their docs in codes.bounds.* still seem to be a mess (as
they have been since many years now). Here a few findings from a recent
attempt to use them in class:
(1) If the code parameters are n = length, d = minimum distance, and q =
size of the alphabet, there seems to be no sy
11 matches
Mail list logo
