[sage-support] Re: solving for numeric values.

2009-05-14 Thread Josephine Ame
Hi, I tried solving a non-linear system to be able to get a plot of g against L as defined in the code below, I have  used the solve command but failed and now I tried the find_root command, the below is the code and the first five result for E=0, but the other results are functions of L and

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread John Cremona
This debate has been going on for as long as computers have been in existence. Yes, there is a case to be made the odd roots of negative reals should return a negative real instead of the principal complex root. But that leads to more subtle problems in other places. If all of mathematica,

[sage-support] Re: VMWare Player versions for Sage 3.4.1

2009-05-14 Thread Alberto
2.5.1 for sure that work. I has using 2.5.2 (that works fine with sage 3.2.2) but it seems to keep sage 3.4.1 in a continuous loop when entering notebook option. Have you check if during instalation the authorizations to wmware networks adapters in the windows firewall? On May 13, 9:18 pm,

[sage-support] Re: VMWare Player versions for Sage 3.4.1

2009-05-14 Thread kilucas
On May 14, 10:43 am, Alberto vand...@gmail.com wrote: 2.5.1 for sure that work. I has using 2.5.2 (that works fine with sage 3.2.2) but it seems to keep sage 3.4.1 in a continuous loop when entering notebook option. Interesting. I'll lok out for that when I get that far! Have you check

[sage-support] Simplification

2009-05-14 Thread Laurent
Hello x,y=var('x,y') s = x*y2 + x*(-y2 - x2 + 1) + x3 - x print simplify(s) Answer : 2 22 3 x y + x (- y - x + 1) + x - x + I'm quite disappointed that

[sage-support] Re: Simplification

2009-05-14 Thread mabshoff
On May 14, 3:57 am, Laurent moky.m...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Hi Laurent, x,y=var('x,y') s = x*y2 + x*(-y2 - x2 + 1) + x3 - x print simplify(s) Answer :                            2         2    2         3                         x y  + x (- y  - x  

[sage-support] Re: Simplification

2009-05-14 Thread simon . king
Dear Laurent, On May 14, 12:57 pm, Laurent moky.m...@gmail.com wrote: Btw, the function simplify_full does not exist ... so I suppose that I *do* miss something. Yes. simplify_full is not a function but a method (after all, python is object oriented). So, you can do: sage: x,y=var('x,y')

[sage-support] Re: Simplification

2009-05-14 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On May 14, 2009, at 3:57 AM, Laurent wrote: Hello x,y=var('x,y') s = x*y2 + x*(-y2 - x2 + 1) + x3 - x print simplify(s) Answer : 2 22 3 x y + x (- y - x + 1) + x - x

[sage-support] Re: Simplification

2009-05-14 Thread Laurent
On May 14, 12:57 pm, Laurent moky.m...@gmail.com wrote: Btw, the function simplify_full does not exist ... so I suppose that I *do* miss something. Yes. simplify_full is not a function but a method (after all, python is object oriented). Thanks all. Indeed, simplify_all(s)

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Bill Page
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: On May 13, 2009, at 9:11 PM, Bill Page wrote: On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: This is because the branch in which the positive real root is real is taken. We're opting for continuity and consistency with

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Bill Page
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:59 AM, John Cremona wrote: This debate has been going on for as long as computers have been in existence.  Yes, there is a case to be made the odd roots of negative reals should return a negative real instead of the principal complex root.  But that leads to more

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Jason Grout
Bill Page wrote: On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:59 AM, John Cremona wrote: This debate has been going on for as long as computers have been in existence. Yes, there is a case to be made the odd roots of negative reals should return a negative real instead of the principal complex root. But that

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Bill Page
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Jason Grout wrote: Bill Page wrote: Consider the problem to define   f(x) = x^(1/3) so that it takes the real branch for x 0.  The best I have been able to come up with so far is: sage: f = lambda x:

[sage-support] Re: solving for numeric values.

2009-05-14 Thread Robert Dodier
On May 14, 1:57 am, Josephine Ame elanma4je...@yahoo.com wrote: What am I doing wrong? z=(g+u)^2 + j^2*w^2 -c_0*exp(-g*L)*(cos(j*w*L)*(g+u)-j*w*sin(j*w*L))/c_0*exp(-g*L)*(cos(j*w*L)* (g+u)-j*w*sin(j*w*L)) Exponentials written as exp(foo) ... OK. Z = 1/P - 1 - (e^2/4)/z Written

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Jason Grout
Bill Page wrote: On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Jason Grout wrote: Bill Page wrote: Consider the problem to define f(x) = x^(1/3) so that it takes the real branch for x 0. The best I have been able to come up with so far is: sage: f = lambda x:

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread Bill Page
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Jason Grout wrote: Bill Page wrote: Ok thanks. I recall the discussion and I can indeed write: sage: f=lambda x:RR(x).nth_root(3) sage: f(-2.0) -1.25992104989487 but I think I'll let my earlier comment stand: I think there should be a more obvious way.

[sage-support] Re: cube roots

2009-05-14 Thread kcrisman
I like Jason's idea (specifically real_nth_root) as a method. However, to me the real issue is plotting. If someone tries to get a cube root of -1 and gets a complex number, at least they see there is an output! And then someone can help them understand why they get that answer. But there is

[sage-support] (most) Sage 3.4.2 binaries posted

2009-05-14 Thread mabshoff
Hello folks, most 3.4.2 binaries are up on sagemath.org and being mirrored out. From the usual suspects some are still missing, i.e. * Fedora Core 10 32 bit * Atom * RHEL 5.2/SLES 10 Itanium * OSX 10.4 Intel Most of the missing binaries will show up in the next 24 hours. We also have some

[sage-support] Re: twist.py

2009-05-14 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On May 14, 2009, at 9:27 AM, RALPH THOMAS wrote: Here is what I put into Sage --- sage: from sage.server.misc import find_next_available_port sage: port = find_next_available_port(, verbose=False) sage: from

[sage-support] Re: twist.py

2009-05-14 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On May 14, 2009, at 12:25 PM, RALPH THOMAS wrote: What I would like to do is have page(form) come up in a browser that would let the user enter a lets say an equation then Sage would solve the equation and show the answer. Or an integral then Sage would calculate the value and display

[sage-support] Re: twist.py

2009-05-14 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On May 14, 2009, at 1:44 PM, RALPH THOMAS wrote: Do you mean this ?php $login_page = file_get_contents(http://localhost:$notebook_server: $notebook_port/simple/login?username=adminpassword=$password' ) preg_match('.*session: ([^]*)', $login_page, $matches) $session = $matches[1] ?

[sage-support] How would I list just the 3 cycles in AlternatingGroup()

2009-05-14 Thread jimfar
I can generate a list from any given group, but how would I go about generating a list of just 3 or 5 cycles? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

[sage-support] Re: How would I list just the 3 cycles in AlternatingGroup()

2009-05-14 Thread David Joyner
I must be missing something. Why can't you just check the order of the element? On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:53 PM, jimfar jamesfar...@mac.com wrote: I can generate a list from any given group, but how would I go about generating a list of just 3 or 5 cycles?

[sage-support] Re: How would I list just the 3 cycles in AlternatingGroup()

2009-05-14 Thread jimfar
I can find the order of the element, but I am looking to generate a list of all of the 3 cycles in something like AlternatingGroup(5) where the list will not go on for too long. On May 14, 5:04 pm, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote: I must be missing something. Why can't you just check the

[sage-support] Re: How would I list just the 3 cycles in AlternatingGroup()

2009-05-14 Thread David Joyner
Why doesn't the obvious 1-liner [x for x in AlternatingGroup(5) if x.order()==3] work? Again, am I missing something? On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:57 PM, jimfar jamesfar...@mac.com wrote: I can find the order of the element, but I am looking to generate a list of all of the 3 cycles in

[sage-support] Re: How would I list just the 3 cycles in AlternatingGroup()

2009-05-14 Thread jimfar
Thanks, I was confusing myself with the definition of the order of an element with order of the cycle. On May 14, 6:52 pm, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote: Why doesn't the obvious 1-liner [x for x in AlternatingGroup(5) if x.order()==3] work? Again, am I missing something? On Thu,

[sage-support] Is nullity of matrix is right nullity of matrix?

2009-05-14 Thread NoSyu
Ah... message is gone, so I write again. OTL... I solve the Linear Algebra course problems on Sage. Now I get the nullity of matrix to use nullity function, but it's weird. If I get the nullity of matrix A to use nullity function like that, A.nullity() but the result of this is same as

[sage-support] Re: Is nullity of matrix is right nullity of matrix?

2009-05-14 Thread Jason Grout
NoSyu wrote: Ah... message is gone, so I write again. OTL... I solve the Linear Algebra course problems on Sage. Now I get the nullity of matrix to use nullity function, but it's weird. If I get the nullity of matrix A to use nullity function like that, A.nullity() but

[sage-support] Re: Is nullity of matrix is right nullity of matrix?

2009-05-14 Thread NoSyu
Thanks to reply my message. I understand it. You're right. From now, I use explicit function likes right_nullity. I learned right nullity convention, so rank + nullity = number of columns. I discuss about it with my Prof. Thanks again. Have a nice weekend.^^