Oy! Mon dieu!
> On Mar 20, 2019, at 14:00 , Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> On 2019-03-20, john_perry_usm wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> 2) In Catholic theology it is not actually "necessary" for Mary to be free
>> of original sin; rather, it is "fitting".
>
> Right, "fitting" may be the better
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 21:00, Simon King wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On 2019-03-20, john_perry_usm wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > 2) In Catholic theology it is not actually "necessary" for Mary to be
> free
> > of original sin; rather, it is "fitting".
>
> Right, "fitting" may be the better wording. And
Hi John,
On 2019-03-20, john_perry_usm wrote:
> ...
>
> 2) In Catholic theology it is not actually "necessary" for Mary to be free
> of original sin; rather, it is "fitting".
Right, "fitting" may be the better wording. And concerning the necessity of
the doctrine of immaculate conception: 13th
I updated my SageMath version to 8.6 and the problem solved.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:44 PM Benyamin M.-Alizadeh <
benyamin.m.aliza...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ~$ sage -i 4ti2
> sage-run received unknown option: -i
> usage: sage [options]
> Try 'sage -h' for more information.
>
>
> On Wed,
~$ sage -i 4ti2
sage-run received unknown option: -i
usage: sage [options]
Try 'sage -h' for more information.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:25 AM Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2019-03-20 05:21, 'benyamin alizade' via sage-support wrote:
> > When I run |sage -i 4ti2, it returns that -i is an unknown
To follow up on Simon King's mostly correct answer:
1) The joke I was trying to make is that it's "immaculate" only if it's
free of all bugs.
2) In Catholic theology it is not actually "necessary" for Mary to be free
of original sin; rather, it is "fitting".
john perry
On Wednesday, March
Hi Emmanuel,
On 2019-03-20, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
> Nice one, Simon ! I'm sorely tempted to mark is as "best answer":-)...
No, it was off-topic. But when a question is raised, I generally try to
answer.
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 4:37:49 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier
wrote:
>
> But I wont, because I tend to think that, as long as we are insisting on
> explicit creation of symbolic variables,
>
An argument that has been used in that context is that in "f(x)=sin(x)" the
`x` does occur on
Hi Simon,
Yes, that's what I meant. I see it as a problem because if you had a python
variable x, it will be overwritten by the symbolic value.
Isuru
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 4:25 AM Simon King wrote:
> Hi Isuru,
>
> On 2019-03-19, Isuru Fernando wrote:
> > If the sage preparser did something
Nice one, Simon ! I'm sorely tempted to mark is as "best answer":-)...
But I wont, because I tend to think that, as long as we are insisting on
explicit creation of symbolic variables, restricting the use of automatic
declaration to the (old) (deprecated) Sage notebook and continue to make
Thanks Simon
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 2:19 PM Simon King wrote:
> On 2019-03-20, Deepak Pawar wrote:
> > looking for the plotting tutorials in 2D and 3D in sagemath. Can anyone
> > suggest me the good resources or link for the same?
>
> Hi Deepak,
>
> this thread is about a totally different
On 2019-03-20, Deepak Pawar wrote:
> looking for the plotting tutorials in 2D and 3D in sagemath. Can anyone
> suggest me the good resources or link for the same?
Hi Deepak,
this thread is about a totally different topic. Next time please open a
new thread when you want to discuss a new topic.
Hi Henri,
On 2019-03-19, henri.gir...@gmail.com wrote:
> What is the difference between virginal conception and immaculate
> conception ?
"Virginal conception" in the context of Christian dogmatics concerns how
Jesus was conceived. "Immaculate conception" concerns how Jesus' *mother*
was
looking for the plotting tutorials in 2D and 3D in sagemath. Can anyone
suggest me the good resources or link for the same?
Thank you
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:32 AM Isuru Fernando wrote:
> If the sage preparser did something like,
>
> __tmp__ = SR.var("x, y"); __tmp_g__ = lambda x, y:
>
Hi Isuru,
On 2019-03-19, Isuru Fernando wrote:
> If the sage preparser did something like,
>
> __tmp__ = SR.var("x, y"); __tmp_g__ = lambda x, y:
> symbolic_expression(x+y**Integer(2)).function(x,y); f = __tmp_g__(*__tmp__)
>
> for
>
> f(x, y) = x + y ** 2
>
> you wouldn't have this problem and
On 2019-03-20 05:21, 'benyamin alizade' via sage-support wrote:
When I run |sage -i 4ti2, it returns that -i is an unknown option for sage.
What happens *exactly*?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this
16 matches
Mail list logo
