[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-30 Thread saad khalid
Thank you for that! I didn't know you could bring up the mail list that way. But that's very promising I think! On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 8:06:16 AM UTC-6, slelievre wrote: > > > > Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 05:23:45 UTC+1, saad khalid a écrit : >> >> I asked the list and here was the

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-28 Thread slelievre
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 05:23:45 UTC+1, saad khalid a écrit : > > I asked the list and here was the response I got. Personally, I think that > it would be a good idea, but I don't know how to implement it myself. > > "The besselexpand is an option variable in maxima core (part of the bessel

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-26 Thread saad khalid
I asked the list and here was the response I got. Personally, I think that it would be a good idea, but I don't know how to implement it myself. "The besselexpand is an option variable in maxima core (part of the bessel function package) and simplify_sum is a share package. In general I think

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-21 Thread kcrisman
> > > 3. Maybe I don't have an appreciation for the complexity of the code(I've > never delved into the source of either Sage or Maxima, at least not yet), > but what kind of possible bugs/obscure interactions could there be in > maxima by setting the flag globally? Isn't it already part of

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-20 Thread saad khalid
Thanks everyone! I do think that it would be ideal if this were "automagically" converted to more elementary functions, especially from the perspective of a student who is trying to get his peers to use Sage. Some thoughts on this: 1. Would it be possible to implement in simplify_full() to,

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-19 Thread Nils Bruin
On Monday, January 18, 2016 at 6:35:59 PM UTC-8, saad khalid wrote: > > Hello everyone: > > I'm trying to compare some functionality in Sage with that of Mathematica. > For my assignment, I have to take this series: > > sum((-1)^n*((x)^(2*n+1))/factorial(2*n+1),n,0,oo) > > > And put it into a

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-19 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 17:22:52 UTC, kcrisman wrote: > > >> As Dima mentions, the relevant functionality is coming from Maxima in >> this case. Maxima does have a flag you can set to let it try to expand >> bessel functions into elementary functions, see >>

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-19 Thread kcrisman
> > > As Dima mentions, the relevant functionality is coming from Maxima in this > case. Maxima does have a flag you can set to let it try to expand bessel > functions into elementary functions, see > http://maxima.sourceforge.net/docs/manual/maxima_15.html#SEC80 > It's not directly exposed

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-18 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 07:56:11 UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > In Sage sum() is by default symbolic summation, here it just gives the > answer in terms of the Bessel function rather than sin. > It is a correct answer, too. > (see e.g. (72) in

[sage-support] Re: Getting a Symbolic version of a Sum

2016-01-18 Thread Dima Pasechnik
In Sage sum() is by default symbolic summation, here it just gives the answer in terms of the Bessel function rather than sin. It is a correct answer, too. Probably the underlying engine (maxima) does not know how to simplify this further. On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 02:35:59 UTC, saad khalid