echniques with Gaussian
> pseudu-random numbers.
> --
> *From:* sage-s...@googlegroups.com <
> sage-s...@googlegroups.com > on behalf of saad khalid <
> saad...@gmail.com >
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 26, 2020 9:41:19 PM
> *To:* s
n sage20:=int(sage16,sage17"Done",
sage18w,sage190):;
"Done"
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 10:21:21 PM UTC-5, saad khalid wrote:
>
> I'm trying to compute/estimate a rather complicated looking integral. Here
> is the code I'm trying to run, with the necessary
I'm trying to compute/estimate a rather complicated looking integral. Here
is the code I'm trying to run, with the necessary constants defined:
var('t1,t2,u,w,k')
T = 1
m = 100
E = 1
v = 0
y=1
O = 1
integral(integral(integral(
integral(integral(
e^(-t1^2/T^2)*e^(-t2^2/T^2)*e^(I*O*t1)*
Hey everyone:
I'm not quite sure what I'm doing incorrectly here, but I wrote some code
which outputs a plot in the end. I start by running:
n =16;
J = 1;
h = 1;
var('T,h');
spinConfig = Tuples([-1,1],n).list()
Then, I run:
def Ham(spins,J,h):
total = J*sum(spins[x]*spins[x+1] for x in
This functionality seems to be intended somehow? At least, it is made
reference to in the documentation:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/matrices/sage/matrix/matrix2.html
Look at the part after:
"A matrix that is not diagonalizable over the rationals, as evidenced by
its Jordan form."
Hi all:
This is a question about usage on Cocalc, apologies if this isn't the right
place. I'm trying to run the following commands in cocalc:
%gp
e(x) = exp(Pi*I*x);
e(1)
Thn(n,z,t,a,b) = e((n+a)^2*t) * e(2*(n+a)*(z+b));
{Th(z,t,a,b) = suminf(n=0,Thn(n,z,t,a,b)) +
y, June 20, 2019 at 9:23:32 AM UTC-4, Kwankyu wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 9:31:05 PM UTC+9, saad khalid wrote:
>>
>> Hi all:
>>
>> The sage documentation hosted online (eg.
>> http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/index.html ) looks very
Hi all:
The sage documentation hosted online (eg.
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/index.html ) looks very old. To
me at least, it makes the software seem ancient, and I believe it puts off
younger new users. The Cocalc interface for Sage maintains a modern looking
aesthetic which
Hi everyone:
I'm trying to using Sage's plot functionality to plot the honeycomb lattice:
https://sites.google.com/site/makingplots4scipurposes/_/rsrc/1456789513003/gnuplot-samples-of-2d-lattices/honeycomb.png
Plotting the honeycomb lattice is slightly different from plotting a simple
(like a
Thank you all for the thoughtful responses, your comments helped me a lot.
One last bit of trouble that I've been having related to this topic. This
was is the code I was running:
Mz = matrix([[0,1],[1,0]])
Mx = matrix([[1,0],[0,-1]])
M1 = Matrix([[1,0],[0,1]])
import numpy as numpy
#R. = QQ[]
nts on the existence
of this issue.
Thanks for all of the help so far, I appreciate it!
On Friday, November 30, 2018 at 4:59:40 PM UTC-5, saad khalid wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not sure what is happening, but I defined some matrices:
> Mz = matrix([[0,1],[1,0]])
> Mx = matrix([[1
,[1,0]])
> Mx = matrix(R,[[1,0],[0,-1]])
> M1 = matrix(R,[[1,0],[0,1]])
> h = M1 + s*Mx
>
> sage: h(s=1/2)
> [3/2 0]
> [ 0 1/2]
>
> Here h is a matrix with entries in R, and substitution works...
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:59 PM saad khalid > wrot
Hi all,
I'm not sure what is happening, but I defined some matrices:
Mz = matrix([[0,1],[1,0]])
Mx = matrix([[1,0],[0,-1]])
M1 = matrix([[1,0],[0,1]])
And then I tried defining a function where I multiply these matrices by
some variable and add them together:
h(s) = M1 + s*Mx
h(.1)
However,
Hey everyone:
Perhaps I am missing something very obvious, but is there an implementation
of the pauli spin matrices in Sage? They are simple enough to define, but
ubiquitous enough that I would have assumed they were predefined.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Oh I see, I had forgotten about the format() command. Thank you!
On Monday, November 12, 2018 at 12:20:14 PM UTC-5, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> I'm doing an assignment in Sage atm (through cocalc specifically), and one
>> thing I am doing is taking the derivative of a function and plugging in x =
>>
Hello everyone:
I'm doing an assignment in Sage atm (through cocalc specifically), and one
thing I am doing is taking the derivative of a function and plugging in x =
0 and showing that it is equal to 0. Since it is true, sage just outputs 0.
I was hoping, however, that there was some way that
Hey everyone:
I'm currently in the process of converting some code from Mathematica to
Sage, my primary motivation being that Mathematica is running it too slowly
and I was hoping that I could somehow get some increase in speed with Sage.
My thought was that this would be easiest if I were
hnik wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 10:23:44 PM UTC, saad khalid wrote:
>>
>> I have to apologize, I gave a slightly incorrect Mathematica code
>> earlier, the actual code was:
>>
>> Solve[ Exp[-2*a*x]-1+4*a*x==0,x]//N
>>
>> The earlier code gave t
==0,x]//N
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 5:14:05 PM UTC-6, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> On 05/03/2018 20:01, saad khalid wrote:
> > Hello, and thank you for your response. While I agree that the behaviour
> of
> > the function certainly complies with the specifications listed in it
Hello, and thank you for your response. While I agree that the behaviour of
the function certainly complies with the specifications listed in its
description, I think everyone would agree that it would be better if it did
give all of the roots in a given interval. Would you happen to know
Hey everyone:
I'm running this code:
find_root(e^(-2*x*1)-(1 - 4*x),-2,2)
It returns
2.4011774461136836e-13
which is approximately 0. However, there should be another root around x =
-0.628. Why isn't it finding this root?
Is there any way I can make sure it finds all of them?
Thanks
--
Hello! I have a function and I would like to plot it, but instead of the
"x-axis" scaling by x, I would like have the x-axis scale by x^2. Is this
possible with the current plot function?
Thanks!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support"
On Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 1:40:35 AM UTC-6, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 3:23:16 AM UTC+1, saad khalid wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone:
>>
>> So, I was just messing around with the assume command, and did:
>>
>> var('i')
Hello everyone:
So, I was just messing around with the assume command, and did:
var('i')
assume(abs(x) < 1)
f(x) = sum(x^i, i, 0, oo )
This is just 1/(1-x). I wanted to see what would happen when I tried using
x > 1, and it still evaluates properly, even though the sum should be
divergent for
On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 1:04:39 AM UTC-5, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>
> Note that contrary to your other examples x2 is not in the expression you
> expand the series from. A typo?
>
>>
>>
Yes, sorry, that was a typo.
But thank you! I hadn't know about needing to substitute x1-1 with a single
Another similar issues is this:
sage: x1,x2,t = var('x1,x2,t')
sage: ((1/(1-x2*x1^t)).taylor(x2,1,4).taylor(x1,1,4)).substitute(x2=1).
coefficient((x1 - 1))
0
sage: x1,x2,t = var('x1,x2,t')
sage: ((1/(1-x2*x1^t)).taylor(x2,1,4).taylor(x1,1,4)).substitute(x2=1)
-1/480*(t^8 - 10*t^6 + 9*t^4)*(x1
Hello everyone:
I'm trying to get particular coefficients from taylor series expansions.
So, I start with the function f(x1,x2) = 1/(1 - x2*x1^t), and I take the
taylor series expansion at x1 = 1, and then I would like the coefficient on
the 1/(1-x1) term. However, when I do this, I get two
I am a student and I definitely agree with Chris Seberino here. I don't
think it is the job of software (or, rather, it is not good CAS design) to
try and teach people mathematics in this way. I think that the CAS should
be as convenient and intuitive as possible. As an example, I didn't even
I'm trying to get an image of just the real line, ideally with a fairly
thick line for the axis, with the points 1 and -1 labelled, but the line
extending beyond them a bit. The main problem I'm having is, I'm trying to
do this with the plot function. I just do
plot(x,x,alpha = 0)
However, I
Wow, sorry about that, I forgot that part... thank you!
--
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 sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to
Not what sure the issue is, but I couldn't find any typos in what I was
doing. I define a function:
gamma3(a,b,c,j) = 1/((e^(2*pi*i*(a*j/16))-1)(e^(2*pi*i*(b*j/16))-1)(e^(2*pi*
i*(c*j/16))-1))
Then I do the sum:
sum(gamma3(1,2,9,j) for j in [1..7]).n()
and this gives me
1.98224774759702 +
Hey everyone:
I'm just looking for the documentation for properly defining functions on
Sage. As far as I can tell, there are several ways to define functions. I
think you can define functions as sage objects, and then functions as
python functions, and then also lambda functions through
Hey everyone:
I would like to use the print function without it creating a new line. From
what I remember, I could do print("whatever I want", end=""), and that
should make it not create a new line. However, when I do this, I get an
error saying
print("hi", end = "")
^
Hello! Some of this information may be of use to you:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/polynomial_rings/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
at 3:44:35 AM UTC-5, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, October 15, 2016 at 9:39:40 PM UTC, saad khalid wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone!
>>
>> So, the title is almost a misnomer, because I don't really want to use an
>> object from Sage in M2 as m
Hello everyone!
So, the title is almost a misnomer, because I don't really want to use an
object from Sage in M2 as much as I want to just use a number from my
python code in M2. Let me explain what I mean. I have a list in M2 with
close to 5,000 matrix groups. Lets call the list MatrixList,
Hello everyone:
So, I have a bit of a python related question, but I wasn't sure where
exactly to ask this. Currently, I've generated a 8000x20 matrix of taylor
series expansion coefficients. So, basically, I had 8000 functions, and I
computed the first 20 taylor series coefficients of each
Hey everyone:
There's a command in M2 called "selectInSubring". I was wondering, though I
know I can use M2 through sage, is there a direct way to do this through
Sage itself? Or is interfacing to M2 the only way? Here is the M2
description of the function:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 12:37:45 AM UTC-5, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>
> On Monday, September 12, 2016 at 9:26:34 PM UTC+2, saad khalid wrote:
>>
>> I couldn't find a better solution, so I made this:
>>
>> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21477
>>
>
I tried checking the process, here was the output:
~/Saad Khalid$ ps x | grep -w 12616
12616 pts/22 Ssl+ 0:00 /usr/bin/M2-binary --no-debug --no-readline --silent
-e ZZ#{Standard,Core#"private dictionary"#"InputPrompt"} = lineno ->
"_EGAS_ :
";ZZ#{
I couldn't find a better solution, so I made this:
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21477
--
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
The reason i didn't run it in a terminal is because the terminal would stop
working after 25 hours(I have 25 hours of inactive time) and, while I know
how to keep a sage worksheet active, I don't know how to keep a terminal
active without interrupting the calculation. I will try running it in
Hello everyone:
I ran a computation on SMC that i figured would take some time. I'm
generating 8000 groups, I believe, which is a slow process. Generating one
group can take a few seconds, so I would expect generating 8000 groups to
take 10-ish hours. However, this computation has been running
In mathematica, there is the function "together" which combines fractions
by giving them a common denominator and then cancels out the factors. It is
shown here:
https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/Together.html
In Sage, I would like to do something similar. I just want to do
A,B =
bump
Is there any interest in this?
--
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 sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send
Hey everyone:
It's seemed to me lately that the state of the documentation is kinda all
over the place and dated. I've been having increasing trouble recently with
finding the documentation for functions online, perhaps my Google skills
are falling off? I know that you can always run
Thank you for the answers! Volker Braun, a question about your answer, I
see that that gives the molien series of a group. However, is there any way
to specify the matrix generating the group, like I did in M2 with the
command:
A=matrix{{zet^1,0,0},{0,zet^2,0},{0,0,zet^3}}
--
You received
Hey everyone:
So, Im going to be writing a program that needs to go through a loop and
store a polynomial from M2 through each loop. I wanted this to work as
quickly as possible, so I was comparing the speed of the toString function
in M2 to the to_sage() part I contributed here:
Very cool, thank you! I looked into UCF a bit and on this page:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/number_fields/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.html
It says "Doing arithmetic in towers of relative fields that depends on
canonical coercions is currently VERY SLOW. It is much better
Hello!
So, I run the following code to compute some numbers. They should all
simplify to whole numbers(the imaginary part is 0), and originally I was
using the simplify_full() function to make this happen, however this become
more and more time intensive until, when using it in this case, the
Hello everyone:
So, say I've got something like this
reset()
z1 = (e^(2*pi*i/15))^6
z2 = (e^(2*pi*i/15))^3
z3 = (e^(2*pi*i/15))^9
z4 = (e^(2*pi*i/15))^12
num = lambda k: -z1^k*(z2-1)^(k+1)*(z3-1)^(k+1)*(z4-1)^(k+1) + -z2^k*(z1-1
)^(k+1)*(z4-1)^(k+1)*(z3-1)^(k+1) +
Hey everyone:
So, it turns out that Macaulay2 has an inbuilt function to convert it's
ascii output of exponents into a normal string. It can be seen at the end
this example:
reset()
macaulay2.eval("""
K = toField(QQ[zet]/(zet^6 + zet^3 + 1))
A=matrix{{zet^1,0},{0,zet^8}}
needsPackage
Here is the full error message:
saad@saad-ThinkPad-X201:~/sage$ git status
On branch t/20936/
adding_conversion_for_divide_and_product_class_in_sage_m2_interface
nothing to commit, working directory clean
saad@saad-ThinkPad-X201:~/sage$ git trac push
Pushing to Trac #20936...
Guessed remote
Ahh yes, sorry, I misspoke. The first part that I ran in the macaulay2.eval
was working fine, it was the sage/m2 conversion that was not working for
me.
Oh okay! I will try to use the GAP interface. It's setup is similar to the
macaulay2 interface, isn't it? As in, I'll be doing gap.eval("the
This is on the same subject, so I thought I'd ask:
I was trying to use the Sage/M2 interface that Dima had been using, but I
couldn't quite get it to work for me. Here is what I was trying to convert
to sage:
macaulay2.eval("""
K = toField(QQ[zet]/(zet^6 + zet^5 + zet^4 + zet^3 + zet^2 + zet +
Many of these expression shouldn't also simplify down to 0 just through
algebra, though the symbolic manipulator usually doesn't recognize that. I
try using using CC(gamma(2)), so that I can see if it's equal to 0, but it
tells me that it can't evaluate a symbolic expression numerically, even
I should add that moving the part where I assign values to the u's to above
the definition of gamma, like so:
reset()
var("G")
var('i')
G = 5
u = [SR("u_%i"%x) for x in [0..G-1]]
u[1] = -1
u[2]= -1
u[3]= -1
u[4]= -1
gamma(k) = (1/G)*sum(-(u[i])^(k-1)/(u[i]-1)^k for i in (1..G-1))
show(1/5 -
I should add that moving the part where I assign values to the u's to above
the definition of gamma, like so:
reset()
var("G")
var('i')
G = 5
u = [SR("u_%i"%x) for x in [0..G-1]]
u[1] = -1
u[2]= -1
u[3]= -1
u[4]= -1
gamma(k) = (1/G)*sum(-(u[i])^(k-1)/(u[i]-1)^k for i in (1..G-1))
show(1/5 - 3*2/5
Thanks for the help guys! :)
--
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 sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
Hey everyone:
So, I start by making a symbolic function. Gamma(k) is the sum of some
variables, u_i. Generating the function by hand is difficult, so I was
hoping I could make it so that Sage generates the function and then I can
give values for the u_i's, and have it compute the value for me.
Is there a reason this is appearing in my post? I can't tell if this is a
glitch or something.
--
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
Hey everyone:
So, I was trying to compute this sum symbolically, and then make it so that
I could plug in values for u later. I don't think that it's possible using
the Sage sum, though it works with the python sum.
This is my attempt to do it using a Sage sum:
reset()
var("G")
G = 5
u =
Thank you for the information! Yeah, it's working just fine now, I have no
idea why it wasn't working before. Maybe it was because I hadn't reset y
before trying to define it as a ring, I'm not too sure. But, it's working
now on a fresh worksheet, so thank you!
--
You received this message
Thanks for the quick reply! Could you explain, or tell me what to search,
what exactly "SR("y%s"%i)" does? Is SR Symbolic Ring? Also, the output for
the sum is close to perfect, though it gives me:
y1 + y10 + y11 + y12 + y13 + y14 + y15 + y16 + y17 + y18 + y19 + y2 + y20 + y3
+ y4 + y5 + y6 +
As another example, here is something I found in Mathematica:
In: Sum[f[i], {i, 1, 5, 2}]
Out: f[1] + f[3] + f[5]
In this case, I believe it is treating f as a function, which is fine as I
will eventually be writing y as a function. I just didn't know how I should
define y in Sage so that it
Not sure if this is helpful:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/interfaces/sage/interfaces/macaulay2.html
Sage also has some functions that do the same thing as M2 (I believe they
run on Singular). For eg, Groebner basis:
Hey everyone:
So, there are some infinite sums that I would like to see computed out to
around 20 terms, just so I can kind of see what form its taking. The
problem is that it's a bit difficult to do by hand, and I'll be changing
the parameters several times which means I would have to do it
Hey everyone:
So, I have the following function:
(2t^3+1)/((t^2+t+1)^2(t-1)^2)
I want to take get the Laurent series expansion of it. It can be seen
through Wolfram Alpha here:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=laurent+series+expansion+of+%282t^3%2B1%29%2F%28%28t^2%2Bt%2B1%29^2%28t-1%29^2%29
Thanks everyone for the responses. I guess I didn't know if there would be
a speed difference between Cython and Mathematica the way there's a
difference between C and Java(Even if it's less pronounced). I like the
idea of implementing it in Sage to get a better grasp of sage/open-source
Hey guys:
I wasn't sure where to ask this, so I thought I'd put it here. I've got a
fairly long algorithm that I've written in Mathematica. I was wondering, do
you think there would be a speed increase if I were to program it into
Sage? What are some tips for a speed increase? I was thinking
Also, I was wondering, does Sage use Singular for all groebner basis
calculations? I was reading that FGb has a much faster implementation:
http://www-salsa.lip6.fr/~jcf/FGb/index.html
I can't seem to find out anywhere if we have any implementation of the
F4/F5 algorithms through FGb. If we
Oh wow... so there's a possibility that the calculation might take million
of years for what I'm trying to do? Or there some easy way to approximate
how long it will take based off of how many variables I have? Thank you!
-Saad
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 2:35:07 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote:
>
Hello everyone! I'm trying to run macauly through sage(it won't work
properly on my own laptop, I think that some of the calculations take up
too much ram and crash my laptop). Anyways, so everything has worked fine
except calculating the groebner basis in this one case. Note that this
crashed
Hey everyone. So, here's the problem I have:
z = x^2 + y^2
x = r*cos(theta)
y = r*sin(theta)
I need to calculate the partial derivative (dz/dx) while holding r
constant. I was hoping I could define all of those functions and then just
use the derivative command, but it doesn't seem to work the
Hey everyone:
So, I'm hitting a bit of a wall trying to edit Sage on SMC. I'm following
this tutorial:
https://github.com/sagemathinc/smc/wiki/SageMath-Development-on-SageMathCloud
In step 4, it says to
sage-dev-images/sage-6.8.beta3
obviously changing it to the appropriate version number.
Hey! I'm in the same boat as you! If you go on trac, at the upper right
side, you can click "View Tickets." When the page loads, one of the options
is "Open Beginner Tickets." I believe that should be what you're looking
for! Alternatively, if there are certain functions that you have wanted to
Thank you for that! I didn't know you could bring up the mail list that
way. But that's very promising I think!
On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 8:06:16 AM UTC-6, slelievre wrote:
>
>
>
> Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 05:23:45 UTC+1, saad khalid a écrit :
>>
>> I
I asked the list and here was the response I got. Personally, I think that
it would be a good idea, but I don't know how to implement it myself.
"The besselexpand is an option variable in maxima core (part of the bessel
function package) and simplify_sum is a share package. In general I think
Thanks everyone! I do think that it would be ideal if this were
"automagically" converted to more elementary functions, especially from the
perspective of a student who is trying to get his peers to use Sage. Some
thoughts on this:
1. Would it be possible to implement in simplify_full() to,
Hello!
I was having a bit of trouble. I was trying to view the documentation for
the exact_rational() command, however nothing I seemed to do worked. I
tried doing "exact_rational()?", "exact_rational?", etc. How exactly can I
go about viewing its documentation? I'm running this in SMC.
-Saad
Hello everyone:
I'm trying to compare some functionality in Sage with that of Mathematica.
For my assignment, I have to take this series:
sum((-1)^n*((x)^(2*n+1))/factorial(2*n+1),n,0,oo)
And put it into a mathematical software to see what function it is
equivalent to. In this case, this
Hey everyone:
For what I'm working on, I'm trying to take transform two variables over a
matrix A, and then have the transformed variables plug into a function.
reset()
n = var("n")
x = var("x")
j = var("j")
k = var("k")
y = var('y')
z = var('z')
A = lambda n,j: (matrix([[cos(2*pi/n),
Hello everyone. I tried using Sage Cloud to write up a little report about
the Q-Polygamma function. However, when i tried to print it as PDF, I got
the error:
Cannot GET
/ed958656-69d9-4ad5-994d-365191c40c28/raw/q-polygamma%20inconsistent%20on%20mathematica.pdf?nocache=0.905481456043941
I'm
Thank you so much for your help. One last issue, I believe. Or rather, it's
a lacking in my understanding.
So, I have this:
sage: Phi = lambda x,q: -ln(1-q) + ln(q)*sum((q^(n*x)/(1-q^n)),n,1,15)
And I run both of your recommendations:
plot(Phi(z,2/3),(z,1,2))
plot(lambda z:
Thank you so much for your help. One last issue, I believe. Or rather, it's
a lacking in my understanding.
So, I have this:
sage: Phi = lambda x,q: -ln(1-q) + ln(q)*sum((q^(n*x)/(1-q^n)),n,
1,15)
And I run both of your recommendations:
plot(Phi(z,2/3),(z,1,2))
plot(lambda z:
I see, thank you for pointing that out. I ran the sum up to n = 5, just for
testing, and I was able to run:
Phi(.1,2/3)
And have it return:
mpf('-2.0635259684891158')
My code now looks like this:
var('q')
var('n')
var('z')
Phi = lambda x,q: -ln(1-q) + ln(q)*sum((q^(n*x)/(1-q^n)),n,1,5)
Hello everyone. I'm trying to write a function for the q-polygamma
function. I'm getting the formula from this:
http://ami.ektf.hu/uploads/papers/finalpdf/AMI_37_from95to100.pdf
It's at the bottom of page 97(page 3 of pdf).
Here is the code I'm running:
var('q')
var('n')
var('z')
Phi = lambda
, 2015 at 5:14:17 PM UTC-5, saad khalid wrote:
I was following along in the sage tutorial for showing variables:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/misc/sage/misc/session.html
I tried running the show_identifier() command in a new worksheet on Sage
Math Cloud, and I got a very long list
Thank you! I've never actually gotten to work on a ticket, so maybe I'll be
able to take a look at this one tonight and see if I can do anything about
it.
On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 5:14:17 PM UTC-5, saad khalid wrote:
I was following along in the sage tutorial for showing variables
I see, thank you again! I tried editting bits of your code to see why mine
wasn't working. It seems as though the main difference between our code is
that you import * whereas I was doing import qgamma. When I run my code
with import *, it works for some reason. Would you happen to know why
defined.
On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 5:14:17 PM UTC-5, saad khalid wrote:
I was following along in the sage tutorial for showing variables:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/misc/sage/misc/session.html
I tried running the show_identifier() command in a new worksheet on Sage
Math
Just for clarification, how did you know from looking at the line qgamma(z+
1,q) that q was supposed to be the first argument given? Because they put
their variable q in second.
Just to double check with wolframalpha, I ran it here:
Thank you so much for your help! I'm sorry for the lack of clarity, I will
work on that. I really appreciate the help everyone gave, thanks again!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
I did this code:
from mpmath import *
plot(qgamma((.5,x), (x, 0, .99)))
I'm just trying to get a 2D plot for x =.5, with q going from 0 to .99.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 1:13:53 AM UTC-5, jori.ma...@uta.fi wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015, saad khalid wrote:
I'm currently trying to get support from my professors in order for our
school to move from Mathematica to Sage Math. One of them challenged me
to - -
What should we
The error ended up being that I had tried to plot it in 3d first, which
required the call q,x = var('q,x'), which messed up my calls to x later. At
least, I think that was the cause. Either way, doing reset() fixed the
problem. The error now is that apparently there's no convergence... it says
Huh... for some reason, now I'm getting a totally different error, I didn't
even change anything. So strange. It's saying:
TypeError: cannot convert 0.500 to an integer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support group.
To unsubscribe
Hello everyone:
I'm currently trying to get support from my professors in order for our
school to move from Mathematica to Sage Math. One of them challenged me to
simply plot the q-gamma function on sage math, which he does on Mathematica
simply by calling on the QGamma function. Here is some
While qgamma isn't a native function, there's a qgamma implementation in
mpmath, one of the libraries included in Sage, so:
from mpmath import qgamma
plot(lambda x: qgamma(4,x), (x, 2, 10))
should give you a plot of gamma_(q=4).
Thank you! Though, looking at the documentation, I think
You wrote x = (-5,5), and then you wanted to plot x^n, which is the same as
(-5,5)^n. What were you intending with that? I'm assuming you wanted the
plots of x^n for x = -5 to x=5? Or were you wanting (-5,5) to be your xmin
and xmax?
On Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 6:24:25 AM UTC-5, Luis
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
