On Jan 26, 2007, at 3:39 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>
> The integer object method "valuation" computes the p-Adic
> valuation, but the
> polynomial object method "valuation" computes a different sort of
> valuation.
> It seems to me that they could be more analogous, but maybe there's
> som
On Friday 26 January 2007 16:14, David Harvey wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2007, at 3:39 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
> > The integer object method "valuation" computes the p-Adic
> > valuation, but the
> > polynomial object method "valuation" computes a different sort of
> > valuation.
> > It seems to me tha
On Jan 26, 2007, at 5:01 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>>> I also don't really think that valuation is the best term to use
>>> for the
>>> integer method. I think it would be better named "ord", but I
>>> don't know if
>>> that term is quite common enough.
>>
>> I prefer valuation, but having ord
On Jan 26, 12:39 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The integer object method "valuation" computes the p-Adic valuation, but the
> polynomial object method "valuation" computes a different sort of valuation.
> It seems to me that they could be more analogous, but maybe there's somet
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:01:32 -0800, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I also don't really think that valuation is the best term to use
>> > for the
>> > integer method. I think it would be better named "ord", but I
>> > don't know if
>> > that term is quite common enough.
>>
>> I pr
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:44:28 -0800, Nils Bruin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 12:39 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The integer object method "valuation" computes the p-Adic valuation, but the
>> polynomial object method "valuation" computes a different sort of valua
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:01:32 -0800, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > I also don't really think that valuation is the best term to use
> >> > for the
> >> > integer method. I think it would be better named "ord", but I
> >> > don't know i
Hi William,
In agreement with Nils, f.valuation() should agree with -f.degree().
This should be a
valid sage session:
sage: f = x^3 + x^5 # = t^-3 + t^-5 = t^-5 (t^2 + 1) where t = 1/x
sage: f.valuation() # should be the valuation at infinity with
uniformizing parameter t
-5
sage: f.factor()
(x^
