yea, that's nearly what I am looking for. Is it possible to consider a
weighted group action too?
e.g. If \xi is of order n and \xi a n-th root of unity.
g (p_1,\dots, p_n) \to (\xi^a_1 p1 , dots, \xi^a_n p_n)?
s.t. \sum a_i = n?
bg,
Johannes
On 19.04.2013 17:53, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
>
On 2013-04-19, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
>
> On 2013-04-18, Johannes wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I have the following setting: Given a finite subgroup G of GL_\C(n) of
>> order k, acting on C[x_1,...,x_n] by multiplication with (potenz of a )
>> k-th root of unity. What is the best way, to tr
thnx,
this looks nice. I'll have a deeper look at it in the next days.
bg,
Johannes
On 19.04.2013 17:53, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
>
> On 2013-04-18, Johannes wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I have the following setting: Given a finite subgroup G of GL_\C(n) of
>> order k, acting on C[x_1,...,x
Hi Johannes,
On 2013-04-18, Johannes wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have the following setting: Given a finite subgroup G of GL_\C(n) of
> order k, acting on C[x_1,...,x_n] by multiplication with (potenz of a )
> k-th root of unity. What is the best way, to translate this setting to sage?
> In the end I
> IMHO most of the time is spent on IPC, via pexpect...
Oh, *THAT* is pexpect ? Then I guess I begin to understand why there
was so much fuss about it being slow some time ago ^^;
Nathann
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send
On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 09:54:15 UTC+2, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > Well, you can call GAP, e.g. as follows:
> >
> > sage: gap("Orbit("+str(ag._gap_())+",[1,2,7],OnSets);")
> > [ [ 1, 2, 7 ], [ 1, 2, 3 ], [ 1, 6, 9 ], [ 2, 3, 4 ], [ 3, 4, 10 ],
> > [ 1, 6, 8 ], [ 3, 4, 8 ], [ 4, 9, 10 ], [
> Well, you can call GAP, e.g. as follows:
>
> sage: gap("Orbit("+str(ag._gap_())+",[1,2,7],OnSets);")
> [ [ 1, 2, 7 ], [ 1, 2, 3 ], [ 1, 6, 9 ], [ 2, 3, 4 ], [ 3, 4, 10 ],
> [ 1, 6, 8 ], [ 3, 4, 8 ], [ 4, 9, 10 ], [ 4, 7, 9 ], [ 5, 8, 10 ],
> [ 2, 5, 7 ], [ 5, 6, 8 ], [ 3, 5, 8 ], [ 4, 6, 9 ]
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> One thing to watch out for is that the generators returned by
>> automorphism_group contain symbols that may not be the actual vertices. I
>> realised this once after several frustrating hours of bizarre results from
>> my program. I'm not
> One thing to watch out for is that the generators returned by
> automorphism_group contain symbols that may not be the actual vertices. I
> realised this once after several frustrating hours of bizarre results from
> my program. I'm not sure if this is still the case in recent versions.
Yep. I w
One thing to watch out for is that the generators returned by
automorphism_group contain symbols that may not be the actual vertices. I
realised this once after several frustrating hours of bizarre results from my
program. I'm not sure if this is still the case in recent versions.
Emil
On 15
On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 01:02:46 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, 14 May 2012 16:57:40 UTC+2, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>>
>> Hellooo everybody !!!
>>
>> I would like to play with groups in Sage but I do not know how. I
>> actually get my groups from a graph in the following way :
On Monday, 14 May 2012 16:57:40 UTC+2, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Hellooo everybody !!!
>
> I would like to play with groups in Sage but I do not know how. I
> actually get my groups from a graph in the following way :
>
> sage: g = graphs.PetersenGraph()
> sage: ag = g.automorphism_group()
12 matches
Mail list logo
