On Sep 29, 2009, at 7:15 PM, Alan Bromborsky wrote:
> Are there differential equation solvers where you don't have to invert
> the matrix?
A Newmark-Beta scheme will directly solve a second-order system of ODEs.
The standard form uses iteration to solve the system so no inversion is
necessary.
Luke wrote:
> I also check the GSL (GNU Scientific Library). They have a nice
> numerical integrator, but it doesn't allow for a mass matrix.
> ~Luke
> On Sep 29, 4:44 pm, Luke wrote:
>
>> Yes, this is something I should look into. I am pretty sure that the
>> Netlib codes have this function
I also check the GSL (GNU Scientific Library). They have a nice
numerical integrator, but it doesn't allow for a mass matrix.
~Luke
On Sep 29, 4:44 pm, Luke wrote:
> Yes, this is something I should look into. I am pretty sure that the
> Netlib codes have this functionality, but it hasn't been w
In the formulation I use for PyDy, the equations of motion are
generated in first order form. For holonomic systems with n degrees
of freedom, there will be 2n first order equations and the first n of
these I refer to as the kinematic differential equations. In the
simplest case, the form of the
Yes, this is something I should look into. I am pretty sure that the
Netlib codes have this functionality, but it hasn't been wrapped into
the Python scientific packages that I know of, at least not yet.
scipy.integrate has odeint and ode, but both need everything in first
order form, no mass mat
Alan Bromborsky wrote:
> Luke wrote:
>
>> On Sep 29, 1:09 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Luke wrote:
>>>
>>>
I'm using Sympy from within PyDy to generate the equations of motion for
mechanical systems. At the end of the day,
Luke wrote:
>
> On Sep 29, 1:09 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Luke wrote:
>>
>>> I'm using Sympy from within PyDy to generate the equations of motion for
>>> mechanical systems. At the end of the day, the equations can be most
>>> generally written as:
On Sep 29, 1:09 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Luke wrote:
> > I'm using Sympy from within PyDy to generate the equations of motion for
> > mechanical systems. At the end of the day, the equations can be most
> > generally written as:
> > M(x) * x'' = F(x, x', t
Dear all,
This is just a short notice to let you know about a little project of mine
that should hopefully be useful to others. I've
been hacking Reinteract (reinteract.org, an interactive Python shell which
allows you to go back and edit previous
statements) to render SymPy objects using MathML (
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Luke wrote:
> I'm using Sympy from within PyDy to generate the equations of motion for
> mechanical systems. At the end of the day, the equations can be most
> generally written as:
> M(x) * x'' = F(x, x', t)
> M(x) is what is known as the mass matrix, and will
I'm using Sympy from within PyDy to generate the equations of motion for
mechanical systems. At the end of the day, the equations can be most
generally written as:
M(x) * x'' = F(x, x', t)
M(x) is what is known as the mass matrix, and will in general depend on the
configuration of the system (po
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Ryan Krauss wrote:
>
> I am writing a journal article where I want to talk about a
> significant speed up in my code by using Sympy and cse. How should I
Very cool, looking forward!
> best cite Sympy? A google scholar search turned up this as the only
> real
I am writing a journal article where I want to talk about a
significant speed up in my code by using Sympy and cse. How should I
best cite Sympy? A google scholar search turned up this as the only
real option:
@techreport{certik2008sympy,
title={{SymPy Python library for symbolic mathematics}
13 matches
Mail list logo
