I am not getting any output with the following integral. No errors — just no
answer:
b=var('b') ; assume(b > 0) ; integrate(1/(x^2+b^2),x,-oo,oo)
Am I doing anything wrong?
Thanks,
Chris Maness
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage
When I enter in the code:
a,b=var('a b');
assume(4*b^2-4*a^20);
assume((b-a)*(b+a)0);
integrate(1/(a-b*sin(x)),x,-oo,oo)
It complains and asks whether (b-a)*(b+a) is negative or positive. This is
redundatnt as I have already made this clear above. Is this a bug, or am I
missing something?
What port does the Sage upgrade use so that IT can add a firewall rule for
me to upgrade Sage?
Thanks,
Chris
--
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
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:02 AM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
What port does the Sage upgrade use so that IT can add a firewall rule
for me to upgrade Sage?
Hi! I'm not sure what you mean; usually the easiest thing to do to
upgrade Sage is either
1) download a new binary
Has anyone tried the 6.3 binary with Sage?
Thanks,
Chris
--
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 sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to
The binary seems to be running fine for now.
Chris
On Oct 21, 2014 12:11 PM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Sage doesn't compile on OSX 10.10 at the moment. See the sage-devel
thread.
On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 6:56:27 PM UTC+1, Chris Maness wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014
Is it possible for sage to use an undefined function such that:
diff(f(x(t),y(t)),t) yields the definition of the total derivative?
In Mathematica I can run:
D[f[x[t],y[t]],t] This yields Latex here $$\frac { df(x,y) }{ dt } =\frac
{ \partial f }{ \partial x } \dot { x } +\frac { \partial f }{
I am thinking I am not a big fan of using the sage -upgrade command since
it downloads all the source and recompiles the whole thing from source. Is
there a clean way to upgrade using binaries?
Regards,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 5:23 PM, ssing...@coe.edu wrote:
On Saturday, August 23, 2014 6:28:33 PM UTC-5, Chris Maness wrote:
I am thinking I am not a big fan of using the sage -upgrade command since
it downloads all the source and recompiles the whole thing from source. Is
there a clean way
Is it possible with sage to use some type of shorthand notation to
denote the first or second time derivative?
Thanks,
Chris
--
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
I would like to take the derivative of a function defined as as such that:
f(x,z)=(2*x+2*z*(dz/dx))/sqrt(x^2+a^2+z^2) and z=z(x) (z is an
unknown function of x). I am working on Euler-Legrange stuff.
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
I am trying to find the roots of the equation:
-cot(x)=sqrt(Z^2/x^2-1)
Z=10;
p1=plot(-cot(x),(x,0,10,),color='red',ymin=-20, ymax=20 );
p2=plot(sqrt(Z^2/x^2-1),(x,0,10));
show(p1+p2);
find_root(cot(x)+sqrt(Z^2/x^2-1),0,10);
But I am getting some strange results. Only one root that does not
I am a bit new to Sage, what method would you recommend for finding
the solutions numerically?
Thanks,
Chris
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Nils Bruin nbr...@sfu.ca wrote:
On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:49:06 PM UTC-7, Chris Maness wrote:
But I am getting some strange results. Only one root
I am not certain why this does not work:
f1=x*e^(-x);
f2=x*e^x;
f=Piecewise([[(0,5),f1],[(0,-5),f2]]);
plot(f,x,-5,5)
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
I got it. I see that I am not supposed to but limits in the plot
function. The limits of the piecewise function provide that
information.
This works:
f1=x*e^x;
f2=x*e^(-x);
f=Piecewise([[(-5,0),f1],[(0,5),f2]]);
f.plot()
Chris
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Chris Maness ch
I think this is the first integral that I have thrown at Sage that
stumps it. Any suggestions on getting this guy to go through.
a=var('a');
assume(a 0);
k=var('k');
assume(k 0);
hbar=var('hbar');
assume(hbar 0);
m=var('m');
assume(m 0);
t=var('t');
assume(t 0);
I don't see what the issue is with the code below:
phinS=e^(i*n*pi*x/a);
phim=e^(-i*m*pi*x/a);
a=var('a');
assume(a 0);
n=1;
m=1;
integrate(phinS*phim,x,-a,a)
I get this undecipherable error:
Traceback (most recent call last):integrate(phinS*phim,x,-a,a)
File , line 1, in module
File
A, that is the issue.
Thanks
Chris
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Nils Bruin nbr...@sfu.ca wrote:
On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 4:33:33 PM UTC-7, Chris Maness wrote:
TypeError: unsupported operand parent(s) for '*': 'Symbolic Ring' and
'type 'function''
This error is more concisely
Is there a way to only add the odd integers of a sum in Sage?
Chris
--
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 sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To
I am running 6.2 on OSX Mavericks (10.9)
Christophers-MacBook-Pro:sage chris$ ./sage -v
Sage Version 6.2, Release Date: 2014-05-06
Chris
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 5:51 AM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
You, saw a plot? I didn't see a plot.
Hmm. Can you say more about *exactly*
Can one define a differential operator like the Hamiltonian energy operator
separately in sage, or does it always have to already be acting and a
function before you make the definition?
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support
That looks correct. Sure wish I could do that :D
Chris
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:50 PM, P Purkayastha ppu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, June 25, 2014 12:39:30 PM UTC+8, P Purkayastha wrote:
On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 8:51:18 PM UTC+8, kcrisman wrote:
You, saw a plot? I didn't see
I would like to plot my wave function probability P vs. x, but it
would be cool if I could have a time slider that shows how the plot
changes parametrically.
Anyone know how to this easily?
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support
Thank you. I am able to do simple examples, but I am having problems
plotting my function without the sliders, so I am going to post that
too.
Chris
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:51 PM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to plot my wave function probability P vs. x, but it
would be
I am trying to plot a superposition of two static states psi1 and psi2
that compose a state system Psi. Here is my code so far:
assume(x, 'real');
n=var('n');
#n=1;
a=var('a');
assume(a 0);
assume(a, 'real');
#a=1;
hbar=var('hbar');
assume(hbar, 'real');
hbar=1;
m=var('m');
m=1;
You, saw a plot? I didn't see a plot.
Chris
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:52 PM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, June 23, 2014 9:18:29 PM UTC-4, Chris Maness wrote:
I am trying to plot a superposition of two static states psi1 and psi2
that compose a state system Psi. Here
Is there a way that I can define my variables to be real, so that when I
take square the modulus, I don't get variables with bars over them when
they are assumed real.
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-support group.
To
Thank you.
Chris
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:47 AM, P Purkayastha ppu...@gmail.com wrote:
sage: bool(x.conjugate() == x)
False
sage: assume(x, 'real')
sage: bool(x.conjugate() == x)
True
On Saturday, June 14, 2014 6:12:06 AM UTC+8, Chris Maness wrote:
Is there a way that I can define
28 matches
Mail list logo
