On Apr 2, 2010, at 9:41 PM, G B wrote:
Thanks for the detailed response, Simon. Please understand that I'm
not being critical of Sage-- quite the contrary, I'm excited about
what it might offer me once I master it.
I think you touch on one key to the problem-- I'm not a
mathematician, I'
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:41 PM, G B wrote:
> Thanks for the detailed response, Simon. Please understand that I'm not
> being critical of Sage-- quite the contrary, I'm excited about what it might
> offer me once I master it.
>
> I think you touch on one key to the problem-- I'm not a mathematic
Thanks for the detailed response, Simon. Please understand that I'm not
being critical of Sage-- quite the contrary, I'm excited about what it might
offer me once I master it.
I think you touch on one key to the problem-- I'm not a mathematician, I'm
an engineer. While most of the world would ce
On 04/02/2010 07:42 PM, Simon King wrote:
Hi!
On 3 Apr., 00:30, G B wrote:
That did it. I found the section in the tutorial explaining the
different interpretations of functions more fully, and while I don't
quite have my head around it, I think I understand the problem at a
basic level to be
Hi!
On 3 Apr., 00:30, G B wrote:
> That did it. I found the section in the tutorial explaining the
> different interpretations of functions more fully, and while I don't
> quite have my head around it, I think I understand the problem at a
> basic level to be that my f(x) is a symbolic expressio
Ok, I'll take that as an admonition to not give up too soon. =)
It does feel like a toolset that would give me a lot of capability if
I can only learn to control it...
Thanks again for the help.
Cheers--
Greg
On Apr 2, 4:31 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:30 PM, G B wro
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:30 PM, G B wrote:
> That did it. I found the section in the tutorial explaining the
> different interpretations of functions more fully, and while I don't
> quite have my head around it, I think I understand the problem at a
> basic level to be that my f(x) is a symbolic
That did it. I found the section in the tutorial explaining the
different interpretations of functions more fully, and while I don't
quite have my head around it, I think I understand the problem at a
basic level to be that my f(x) is a symbolic expression, but
get_random_element() is a Python fun
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:01 PM, G B wrote:
> Apologies for being dense, but I'm missing something. All three forms
> ( f(x), def f(x) and f=lambda x: ) are giving the same results.
>
>
> Trying:
> -
> var('x')
> T=RealDistribution('gaussian',1)
> def f(x):
> return sin(x)+ T.get_rando
Should mention this is 4.3.3, 64 bit OS X 10.6.2
On Mar 30, 7:01 pm, G B wrote:
> Apologies for being dense, but I'm missing something. All three forms
> ( f(x), def f(x) and f=lambda x: ) are giving the same results.
>
> Trying:
> -
> var('x')
> T=RealDistribution('gaussian',1)
> def f
Apologies for being dense, but I'm missing something. All three forms
( f(x), def f(x) and f=lambda x: ) are giving the same results.
Trying:
-
var('x')
T=RealDistribution('gaussian',1)
def f(x):
return sin(x)+ T.get_random_element()
plot(f(x),(x,0,2*pi))
-
and
var(
11 matches
Mail list logo
