The binary installation is completely self-contained, so will not be
> affected by anything the IT administrators may have installed.
>
> - Marc
>
> On Thursday, August 22, 2024 at 9:27:25 AM UTC-5 Ben Salisbury wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how to tell what's suppos
u have stuff in /usr/local that does not belong
> there.
>
> On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 8:40:01 AM UTC-7 Ben Salisbury wrote:
>
>> Hi. I'm trying to build Sage from source (the develop branch) on an M2
>> MBAir running Sonoma 14.5 and the build continues to fail at gmp
Hi. I'm trying to build Sage from source (the develop branch) on an M2
MBAir running Sonoma 14.5 and the build continues to fail at gmp. I
downloaded a fresh copy of Command Line Tools and installed all the brew
packages. Here is my brew list:
salis1bt@MTH158053PE212 sage % brew list
==> Fo
I just realized that was the issue. Thank for the response.
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 8:39:14 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> This is a customized version of Sage. For example, the file
> src/sage/dynamics/complex_dynamics/mandel_julia.py (which is causing the
> problems) does not exist
Error 1
I have tried to build Sage several times now and it keeps giving me an
error.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Ben Barros
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
I think what I'm seeing here is a RunTimeError caused by a recursion depth
exceeded on a call to .__invert__ for a ComplexIntervalField element.
If I increase the precision enough, I don't see this anymore. Is this a bug
or should I just try/except for RunTimeError and increase the precision in
Wednesday, August 17, 2016 at 4:19:19 PM UTC-5, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> On 17/08/16 18:09, Ben wrote:
> > I came across the following behavior for .roots() of a polynomial
> >
> > R.=QQ[]
> > G=z^6 + z^5 + 4*z^4 + 3*z^3 + 7*z^2 + 4*z + 5
> > G.roots(ring=C
r, but you cannot find the roots if it is the base_field. Am I
right in thinking this is a missed case in the algorithm selection?
The following fails as well:
R.=QuadraticField(-2)[]
G=z^6 + z^5 + 4*z^4 + 3*z^3 + 7*z^2 + 4*z + 5
G.roots(ring=CIF)
Thanks,
Ben
--
You received this message becau
That is great. Now, is there someway to permanently associate those two
parameters to the graph? i.e., G.show() has the colors and title?
On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 2:43:17 AM UTC-4, jori.ma...@uta.fi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Ben wrote:
>
> > .graphplot() or .sh
ex_colors={(0.0,
1.0, 1.0): [0, 1], (1.0, 0.0, 0.0): [2,3,4]})
I'd like to display with the graph something like
color1 = property A
color2 = property B
Thanks,
Ben
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubs
://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/quat_algebras/sage/algebras/quatalg/quaternion_algebra.html
Thanks
Ben
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sa
38 AM UTC-8, Ben wrote:
>>
>> err...I don't think that is true. Doesn't it just change a Boolean to
>> allow the addition of new coercisions (that is what the doc string
>> suggests). Testing this, it sounds like you are saying the following should
>> r
Sage after
> this call is pretty bad.
>
> 2015-02-21 15:54 UTC+01:00, Ben >:
> > Yes, that is certainly better, but I will be given the polynomial
> already
> > constructed, so I need to see if there is an embedding and create one if
> > not.
&g
> (0.3129476711945694? + 0.8871991995507695?*I, 1),
> (0.5799919467307427? - 0.2936333884651673?*I, 1)]
>
> 2015-02-21 15:30 UTC+01:00, Ben >:
> > Yes, the how to do that was my question. I've been looking around to
> try
> > and figure it out and have come up with
ead my answer? You need to specify the embedding of K in QQbar.
>
> 2015-02-21 15:06 UTC+01:00, Ben >:
> > Yes, I know my F had QQ coefficients. Imagine it doesn't e.g.,
> >
> > R.=QQ[]
> > K.=NumberField(x^2+2)
> > R.=PolynomialRing(K)
> &
Yes, I know my F had QQ coefficients. Imagine it doesn't e.g.,
R.=QQ[]
K.=NumberField(x^2+2)
R.=PolynomialRing(K)
F=z^6 + 2*z^5 + 2*z^4 + 2*z^3 + z^2 + t
F.roots(K.algebraic_closure())
I was looking at that embedding operation, but it looks like I wasn't using
it correctly. Does this have to be
and use .roots() there, but this
is *very* slow whereas f.roots(QQbar) is very fast when f is defined over
QQ.
Thanks,
Ben
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from i
eturns the 24 elements of
the matrix group in a list. Also, the newer version can not run
G4.is_finite(), whereas the old version does. This leads me to believe that
somewhere between 5.9 and the current release there were changes which
broke the matrix group functionality.
One more thing about
I am trying to get sage to list the elements of a (finite) finitely
generated matrix group.
It works in version 5.9 installed on a Mac, but not on 6.11 on linux or on
the cloud, which leads me to believe somewhere between 5.9 and 6.11 the
.list() operation for finite matrix groups was comprom
Yes, it appears there were some characters hiding in the files. Running
dos2unix seems to have done the trick.
Thanks.
On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11:06:42 PM UTC-5, leif wrote:
>
> Keshav Kini wrote:
> > Ben > writes:
> >> The patch was created on my virtual box Ubu
The patch was created on my virtual box Ubuntu system, and e-mailed through
the windows side. The attachment was then downloaded directly to the new
Ubuntu system.
On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:55:13 PM UTC-5, leif wrote:
>
> Ben wrote:
> > As far as I can tell, yes these are bein
se fix and refresh test.patch
On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:28:33 PM UTC-5, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:08:57 PM UTC-7, Ben wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to help someone install patches on their sage and it has gone
>> beyond my ability to diagnose
m are identical and the patch applies on mine
without issue, so this seems like some kind of configuration problem.
We've tried both hg and sage -hg and checked that the patch file and .hgrc
are without errors. What else could be going wrong here?
Thanks,
Ben
--
You received this message b
I have used it in the past, but not for anything essential. As long as
there was support for a search path, that would be fine for me.
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 4:49:06 AM UTC-5, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> The plan would still be to support a search path, just not look at
> (undocumented) shell envi
I was unable to find a final resolution of this (and doesn't seem to work
for me on 10.8.2 and sage5.5). The certtool errors are the same. Is there a
ticket on this (I couldn't find one) or a work around?
On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:51:26 AM UTC-4, Ivan Andrus wrote:
>
> On Oct 31, 2012, at
This is now trac# 13903
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 11:25:44 PM UTC-5, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On 2013-01-02, Ben > wrote:
> > --=_Part_341_11301648.1357151831744
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> &
Thanks.
Should I open a trac ticket for this then?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googl
I came across the following behavior for polynomial rings.
R.=PolynomialRing(Qp(5),2, order='lex')
G=[y1^2 + y2^2, y1*y2 + y2^2, y2^3]
(y2^3).reduce(G).parent()
returns an `int`, whereas for other (non p-adic) fields it returns a
polynomial ring element:
R.=PolynomialRing(QQ,2, order='lex')
G=[
Thanks. That sounds like it might get around the residual memory issue.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-suppo
Thanks. I'll take a look at the toric varieties product and see if that
will work for what I'm doing.
On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 10:53:58 AM UTC-5, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Sorry for the spurious line, should have been:
>
> sage: fan1 = toric_varieties.P1().fan()
> sage: fan2 = toric_varieties.P
d essentially have a "clean
slate" for the next iteration? (I'd like to be doing millions or billions
of such computations...)
I'd post my code except that it isn't a nice simple snippet. It involves a
couple experimental patches and the computation is actually quite in
Is there currently a way to define a product of projective spaces. (i.e.
$\mathbb{P}^n \times \mathbb{P}^m$), then be able to work with projections
to either component, points, subschemes, etc.
Thanks,
Ben
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"
I'm trying to compute the critical point portrait of a map and plot the
resulting object as a digraph, but I'm having trouble using QQbar elements.
Here is an explicit example
R.=PolynomialRing(QQbar)
w=(x^2+3).roots()[0][0]
R.=PolynomialRing(QQbar)
B=(b^8 + 327680*b^6 - 1529008357376*b^4 +
607
b]
[ a b*c/a +
1 c]
[ 0 -(b*c/a - 1)*b/a + c - b/a
-b*c/a + 1]
sage:
Am I supposed to do something else to tridiagonalize a symmetric matrix?
Thanks,
Ben
--
To post to this gro
Thanks, this exactly fixes what I'm trying to do.
Ben
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group
globals())+"\\n");
execfile(os.path.abspath("___code___.py"))
File "", line 1, in
File "/tmp/tmpTZzoeR/___code___.py", line 8, in
exec compile(u'b**_sage_const_3 +_sage_const_1 /_sage_const_3
File "", line 1, in
File
&
. For
example,
AS.=AffineSpace(1,QQ)
AS.coordinate_ring()
returns a multivariate polynomial ring.
Is this a bug? Is there a way to get the affine coordinate ring to be
univariate?
Thanks,
Ben
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group,
> Thus (0,0,0) is the unique solution of your system.
Uh... not quite 'Thus'. The system in fact has an infinite number of
unique solutions, as the original poster pointed out. Though I don't
know why sage converges on [0,0,0]. Also just because a second sage
method gives the same result as the fi
their specific
subfields very well, but they aren't very good at interacting with all
the other parts of my computer, the internet, or other things that
computer scientists are interested in. Sage on the other hand has
python which can interface with anything and do the math once the data
is
er the discussion to why we should be using open
source software to do research, and all the advantages that can
provide.
On Sep 9, 9:54 am, kcrisman wrote:
> On Sep 9, 11:41 am, Ben Edwards wrote:
>
> > I might shy away from any personal attacks on Stephen Wolfram, despite
> >
s not only good for mathematical research, but any scientific
and engineering research, just because of the huge number available
packages to use in python. I can't say I think the same is true with
mathematica.
Ben
On Sep 9, 8:08 am, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> Hi
>
> > >
Just because it might be interest to all the mathematicians out there,
there is an interesting proof out there that is being taken at least a
little seriously showing P!=NP
http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/08/08/a-proof-that-p-is-not-equal-to-np/
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-su
I have written a function to compute the Macaulay resultant of 3
degree 2 homogenous polynomials via the determinant of a matrix
depending on the coefficients. It seems to take a very long time to
compute the determinant, I didn't actually get it to finish (which is
not true in Pari/gp). I was ab
Yes. Now ZZ[0].coefficients() works.
Thanks.
On Jul 22, 2:22 am, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
> Ben a crit :
>
>
>
> > I'm trying to take a rational map on P^1 (i.e. f(x,y) = [deg 2 poly,
> > deg 2 poly] and conjugate, but I can't seem to get sage to cooperate.
&g
oeff(R6,1,x1),polcoeff(R6,1,x2),polcoeff(R6,1,x3),polcoeff(R6,1,y1),polcoeff(R6,1,y2),polcoeff(R6,1,y3)
];
}
Some help as to the correct way to do this in sage would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Ben
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this grou
print "(3,1) is in prime:",0==a7%i
print "(3,2) is in prime:",0==a8%i
Best,
Ben
On Mar 4, 10:15 am, Marshall Hampton wrote:
> If Ben or Justin could post a properly indented version I am willing
> to take a look. Maybe I'm not
here.
Anyway, I'm a complete novice when it comes to this. How do I delete
variables so that the program does not hog so much memory when set to
run for a long period of time?
Thanks again,
Ben
On Mar 3, 9:12 pm, "Justin C. Walker" wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2010, at 14:09 , Ben Lino
s in prime:",0==a4%i
print "(3,1) is in prime:",0==a7%i
print "(3,2) is in prime:",0==a8%i
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
Best,
Ben
On Mar 3, 4:28 pm, Alex Ghitza wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 08:08:13 -0800 (PST), Ben Linowitz
> wrote:
> > I wrote a l
er is: SAGE Version 3.1.2,
Release Date: 2008-09-19
Thanks,
Ben Linowitz
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.googl
Thank you Yann and Simon for your suggestions.
I think solve() may be too limited for my actual problem, but
augmenting the ideal with additional polynomials could work with a bit
of effort on my part.
Thanks again,
Ben
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To
e for the roots of a complicated polynomial system when there are
square roots? I do not need support for arbitrary exponents, just
square roots and multiples of 2.
Thank you very much,
Ben
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
s
e as a top
level command would greatly help students. Having to switch from
integrate(f,x,a,b) to f.nintegrate(x,a,b) is not a simple obvious
switch for beginning students.
Thanks for the feedback. Should this thread be moved to the developer
group to add nintegrate as a top-level command?
Merry C
the answers without using an assuming
commands, since by specifying the bounds are between 0 and pi/3 I am
already declaring cos(x)>0 and x to be real.
Could this be related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6956
Thanks for the great product.
Ben Woodruff
BYU-Idaho
--
To post to
Thank you everyone! :)
On Jan 20, 9:56 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> Tim Lahey wrote:
> > However, in my version of Sage (3.2), the functions simplify_full()
> > and simplify_trig() only seem to be defined on objects not as
> > general functions. Unless I'm missing something.
>
> I noticed that too.
Hi,
I tried this:
sage: simplify(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^2)
sin(x)^2+cos(x)^2
Are there any functions that are able to do further simplification?
Thanks,
Ben
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
Thanks everyone! I am unsure how to use Robert's API as I haven't been
able to find any documentation, but that may be a better idea given
the security issue that Jason raised. Does anyone know where I could
find some examples of its usage?
Thanks again,
Ben
On Jan 13, 4:55 pm, &quo
PU time 0m0.04s, Wall time 0m0.04s).
Press enter to continue
however, when I execute the script from PHP using this:
echo exec("cd /home/ben/Desktop && ./test.sh",$out);
print_r($out);
it outputs:
**
Welcome
)
271
272 @Memoizer('Basic', MemoizerArg((type, type(None), tuple),
name='type'), return_value_converter = lambda obj: obj.copy())
: '6 y - 3 x == 15' is NOT a valid SymPy
expression
sage:
For some reason, it gets transformed into '6 y - 3 x == 15&#x
On Feb 18, 3:58 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe Sage simply calls Maxima for the solution. Since you
> obviously know the
> most about the problem, perhaps the easiest thing to do would be to determine
> that it is Sage and not Maxima that is at fault. Perhaps you could s
On Feb 18, 3:14 pm, Ben Goodrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I maintain an R package, but there is one place where a symbolic
> solution is needed to verify a result. I would like to write an R
> function that prints proper SAGE input so that users can easily feed
> it to SAG
ys there is no solution to this
system of equations. What should I be doing differently?
Thanks in advance,
Ben
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fo
61 matches
Mail list logo
