Why is zoo*zoo nan?
In [71]: zoo*zoo
Out[71]: nan
It seems to me that the result should just be zoo.
Aaron Meurer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this g
what is zoo anyway - I was not able to find anything - even on google
-Sebastian
PS: sorry for beeing OT
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Aaron Meurer wrote:
> Why is zoo*zoo nan?
>
> In [71]: zoo*zoo
> Out[71]: nan
>
> It seems to me that the result should just be zoo.
>
> Aaron Meure
zoo is complex infinity (i.e., S.ComplexInfinity). See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_point_compactification and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_sphere. If you think of oo
(infinity) as the limit of arbitrarily large real numbers, you can
think of zoo as the limit of complex numbers with a
In that case, zoo*zoo is zoo. No ?
Christophe BAL
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more
Yes, I believe it should. That's why I'm wondering why it gives nan.
Aaron Meurer
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Christophe BAL wrote:
> In that case, zoo*zoo is zoo. No ?
>
> Christophe BAL
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
>
Am 25.02.2012 23:23, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
Yes, I believe it should. That's why I'm wondering why it gives nan.
Same here.
My intuition tells me that whatever path you take for
lim re,im->oo: re+i*im
you get zoo.
Wikipedia says that zoo*zoo is commonly defined as zoo.
--
You received this
I've created http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3106 for
this. It should be easy to fix.
Aaron Meurer
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
> Am 25.02.2012 23:23, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
>
>> Yes, I believe it should. That's why I'm wondering why it gives nan.
>
I know this is not very helpful, but I am fairly certain we discussed
this kind of subject, about two years ago, but never really reached a
conclusion. The point is that of cours zoo+zoo should be nan (whereas it
seems like zoo*zoo need not be, but perhaps that was never fixed).
Tom
On 25.02.
