Scroll back in this discussion. The math/arithmetic problems, other than getting good symbolic expression, have been solved in the "uncertainties" package ( http://pypi.python.org/pypi/uncertainties/) you mentioned before.
Jonathan On Friday, March 30, 2012 7:11:20 PM UTC-5, Eviatar wrote: > > The auto-update should be easy to implement. However, now that I've looked > into error propagation, an interval seems like a very wrong way to > represent uncertainty in physical measurements (apparently Mathematica does > *not* do this; I don't know why I thought that). So the only alternative > I see is to just have the nominal value, which is not ideal. I'll see how > difficult it is to implement the error propagation; for now the only > problems seem to be finding correlation between variables (otherwise you > get strange things like x-x!=0, when x is a number with uncertainty). > > @Keshav Kini > Not exactly. Although it is a probability distribution, the bounds > *are*strict; one standard deviation (at least in the case of the NIST > constants). The way operations are handled is just different; see > http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Analytical_Chemistry/Quantifying_Nature/Propagation_of_Error > . > -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
