As reported here in other threads it seems that jmol-based 3-graphics
fails in FireFox under Windows XP. I am not sure if it is all
configurations anv versions or only some but I do have one laptop
running Windows XP and the most recent version of FireFox and this
still fails with the newest
know.
In any case, XPOLY might serve as a starting point for something
similar in Sage.
Regards,
Bill Page.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Nicholas
Jacksonnicholas.jack...@warwick.ac.uk wrote:
I'm trying to use SnapPy [1] to calculate Alexander polynomials of knot
complements. SnapPy (which
that.
Regards,
Bill Page.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 10:43 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Martin
Rubeymartin.ru...@math.uni-hannover.de wrote:
If you are running longer jobs with fricas, you should consider
switching to a faster lisp implementation
to reproduce the problem.
Regards,
Bill Page.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http
[ x ] No, I can read the above just fine. It is crystal clear.
... but of course unnecessarily verbose. In my opinion a more common
notation in Sage:
sage: x=2*vector(range(10))+vector(10*[3])
sage: list_plot(map(lambda a:[cos(a),sin(a)],x/max(x)))
is superior to Mathematica.
On Tue, Jul
[ x ] No, I can read the above just fine. It is crystal clear.
... but of course unnecessarily verbose. In my opinion a more common
notation in Sage:
sage: x=2*vector(range(10))+vector(10*[3])
sage: list_plot(map(lambda a:[cos(a),sin(a)],x/max(x)))
is superior to Mathematica.
On Tue, Jul
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
obvious way.
Regards,
Bill Page.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http
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: RealField(53)(x).sign()*(RealField(53)(x).sign()*x
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
Can someone explain this apparently inconsistent result?
--
| Sage Version 3.4, Release Date: 2009-03-11 |
| Type notebook() for the GUI, and license() for information.|
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Bill Page wrote:
Can someone explain this apparently inconsistent result?
It's just operator precedence:
sage: -(2.0^(1/3))
-1.25992104989487
sage: (-2.0)^(1/3)
0.629960524947437 + 1.09112363597172*I
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Alex Ghitza wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Bill Page wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Bill Page wrote:
Can someone explain this apparently inconsistent result?
It's just operator
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 complex numbers.
If I wrote:
sage: ComplexField(53)(-2.0)^(1/3)
0.629960524947437 + 1.09112363597172*I
that
administration to add an alias
for you?
Regards,
Bill Page.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com
15 matches
Mail list logo
