Hi,
I actually do get this result:
(1) -> integrate(1/x,x)
(1) log(x)
Type: Union(Expression Integer,...)
(2) -> solve(%=1,x)
(2) [x= %e]
Type: List Equation Expression Integer
and I assume that that is what you want. You can of course do a solve on
log(x)-log(1), which would give the same result.
However, I do get this:
(3) -> integrate(1/x,x=1..t)
(3) potentialPole
Type: Union(pole: potentialPole,...)
which happens, I assume, because it is possible that t = 0. How would one go
about telling axiom that 1 is in fact the lower boundary and t the upper
boundary, or t >= 1, or even at least that t > 0?
Regards,
S.
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 05:09:18PM +1000, Alasdair McAndrew wrote:
> I also notice that pi is defined as an operator, so that pi() returns
> the result %pi. I wonder how hard it would be to include useful
> constants in Axiom, and to be able to enter (for example)
> solve(integrate(1/x,x=1..t)=1,t)
> and obtain the answer %e.
> Alasdair
>
> On 25 May 2007 06:42:37 +0200, Martin Rubey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
> "Alasdair McAndrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > writes:
> > I find the behaviour of constants rather inconsistent.
> Yes, certainly.
> > And it's odd that %e::Float doesn't work, but %e+0::Float
> look at the type of %e+0.0 and you will understand. Note that it is
> *not*
> Float.
> > (and any other arithmetic involving %e) does.
> No: sin(%e)::Float does not work.
> > Also, the Euler-Mascheroni constant should be in there!
> Yes, certainly.
> Martin
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 2. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> _______________________________________________
> Axiom-mail mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-mail
--
Sumant S. R. Oemrawsingh
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Axiom-mail mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-mail
