On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 3:10:29 AM UTC-7, Peter Luschny wrote:
>
> Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 10:49 Uhr 'luisfe' :
>
> | When n =0, k ranges from 0 to -1 so there is no k and the list
> constructed in ib(n,m)
> | is just the empty list. Not an empty list of polynomials, just an empty
>
in the beginning of your Sage session do
sage: from sage.interfaces.gap import set_gap_memory_pool_size
sage: set_gap_memory_pool_size()
Check out its docs for details:
sage: set_gap_memory_pool_size?
Signature: set_gap_memory_pool_size(size_in_bytes)
Docstring:
Set the desired gap
This looks like a Sage bug.
Indeed, in src/sage/groups/matrix_gps/orthogonal.py one sees
if invariant_form is not None:
if is_FiniteField(ring):
raise NotImplementedError("invariant_form for finite
groups is fixed by GAP")
And it should be triggerred for your
Hello,
I was trying to compute with the general orthogonal group. If I am not
wrong, I think that one can specify the bilinear form for the general
orthogonal group.
I did the following:
sage: b
[0 0 0 1 0 0]
[0 0 0 0 1 0]
[0 0 0 0 0 1]
[1 0 0 0 0 0]
[0 1 0 0 0 0]
[0 0 1 0 0 0]
This defines
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 11:29 Uhr schrieb slelievre <
samuel.lelie...@gmail.com>:
> So, replace
>
> sum(binomial(m*n-1, m*k)*OmegaPolynomial(m,k) for k in (0..n-1))
>
> by
>
> sum((binomial(m*n-1, m*k)*OmegaPolynomial(m, k) for k in (0 .. n-1)),
> RR['x'].zero())
>
Now, this is clever!
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 10:49 Uhr 'luisfe' :
| When n =0, k ranges from 0 to -1 so there is no k and the list
constructed in ib(n,m)
| is just the empty list. Not an empty list of polynomials, just an empty
list.
Well, then the way 'sum' is implemented is possibly improvable?
The type
Tue 2019-06-25 10:49:44 UTC+2, luisfe:
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 10:03:03 AM UTC+2, Peter Luschny wrote:
>>
>> How that? Look at the output above. Sage *knows* that the terms of the
>> sum
>> are polynomials. So it should return the zero of that ring, which is the
>> null polynomial.
Hello All,
I tried to google my way out of this, but couldn't.
I am using GO(d,q,1,b) in sage. It is the general orthogonal group. Not
important for my question.
The part that is important to my question is that sage uses GAP to
construct this object.
Now if I take a slightly bigger
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 10:03:03 AM UTC+2, Peter Luschny wrote:
>
> How that? Look at the output above. Sage *knows* that the terms of the sum
> are polynomials. So it should return the zero of that ring, which is the
> null polynomial.
>
>
Not in the first case, look at what are you
Would you share the definition of OmegaPolynomial?
This would help figure out / explain what the issue is.
--
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
Am Montag, 17. Juni 2019 14:27:40 UTC+2 schrieb luisfe:
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 5:18 AM Peter Luschny wrote:
>>
>>> def ib(m, n): return sum(binomial(m*n-1, m*k)*OmegaPolynomial(m,k) for k
>>> in (0..n-1))
>>>
>>> The terms "binomial(m*n-1, m*k)*OmegaPolynomial(m,k)" are of type
>>> >>
11 matches
Mail list logo
