Log[1/E^.5] -0.5 Log[1/E^-.5] � .5 True Refine[1/E^x, 0<x<1] E^-x Or if you need to, Refine[Log[1/E^x], 0<x<1] -x Kris -------------- Original message -------------- > On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 08:24:53 +0000 (UTC), Bob Hanlon > wrote: > > >The output that you want is "unstable", i.e., Mathematica automatically > >converts it. > > > > Thanks. > > I have another question if you don't mind. > > I'm trying to just check and see if I got a whole bunch of > even-numbered study exercises r...

On 12/4/05 at 5:57 AM, NewGuy@yahoo.com (New Guy) wrote: >On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 11:05:41 +0000 (UTC), Jean-Marc Gulliet ><jeanmarc.gulliet@gmail.com> wrote: >>Now, the base of the natural logarithm is written E (capital e). >Beg to differ here. The BasicInput.nb palette uses the small 'e' >that is kind of double-struck. The BasicInput palette displays the constants Pi and E in TraditionalForm. If you type E//TraditionalForm into an empty cell, the corresponding output cell will be the same character you get after clicking the entry button on the BasicInput pallete. The point is, to enter the constant E from the keyboard, you enter it as a capital E. -- To reply via email subtract one hundred and four ...

The output that you want is "unstable", i.e., Mathematica automatically converts it. 25*5^h 5^(h + 2) You will have to force the form sr=n_Integer^(m_Integer+x_):>HoldForm[Evaluate[n^m]]*n^x; 5^(2+h)/.sr 5^h*HoldForm[25] ReleaseHold[%] 5^(h + 2) expr=5^(7x/2)-5^(x^2); Sqrt[5^x]*Simplify[expr/Sqrt[5^x], Element[x, Reals]] Sqrt[5^x]*(-5^(x^2 - x/2) + 125^x) Bob Hanlon > > From: Bookreader <Bookreader127@yahoo.com> > Date: 2005/11/26 Sat AM 02:47:04 EST > Subject: Output display of exponential function in Mathemat...

So far I could resist the temptation to participate in this discussion. However, in his mail Maxim Rytin presents some examples of which he thinks the result is unpredictable. Maybe there is some interest in how I predict the results of simple commands in which Unevaluated occurs. Of course these examples are of no practical interest. Unevaluated is meant to pass unevaluated arguments to a function body and as such it works perfectly. No one in practice is interested in (1+1)*Unevaluated[2+2]. The basic principle has been clearly explained by Andrzej Kozlowsky. Suppose we have a ...

I must agree about the debugger. I was very excited by the release of Workbench 1.0 because of the promise of a good debugger. I even took a course on it. The reality is that Workbench is so hard to use ( I can't bring in my old code and debug changes- it just doesn't work) that I never use it. So I'm back to using Print statements again. I love Mathematica but would love to have an easy to use debugger with break points, etc. Oh well. Cliff Nasser Abbasi <nma@12000.org> wrote: "Murray Eisenberg" wrote in message news:fdf236$20u$1@smc.vnet.net... &...

> Many thanks to all who have responded to my question. > The question I posted was actually a smaller section of what I had > originally planned on asking. I was hoping to use what I had learnt > from your answers and apply it to a larger problem but I haven't had > much success. > > What I want is to go from expression1: > -((P10 P20 P30)/Sqrt[2]) + (i P10 P20 P30)/Sqrt[2] - i P11 P20 P30 + > i P10 P21 P30 + (P11 P21 P30)/Sqrt[2] - (i P11 P21 P30)/Sqrt[2] - > P10 P20 P31 - (P11 P20 P31)/Sqrt[2] - (i P11 P20 P31)/Sqrt[2] + ( > P10 P21 P31)/Sqrt[2] + (i P10 P21 P31)/Sqrt[2] + P11 P21 P31 > > to expression2: > ((1 + Sqrt[2]) i - 1)/4*(P10 - P11) - ( > 1 + Sqrt[2] + i)/4*(P20 - P21) + ( > 1 - Sqrt[2] + i)/4*(P10 - P11)*(P30 - P31) + ( > 1 + (Sqrt[2] - 1) i)/4*(P20 - P21)*(P30 - P31) > > Given that P10 + P11=1,P20 + P21=1 and P30 + P31=1, > expression 2 becomes expression3: > ((1 + Sqrt[2]) i - 1)/4*(P10 - P11)*(P20 + P21)*(P30 + P31) - ( > 1 + Sqrt[2] + i)/4*(P10 + P11)*(P20 - P21)*(P30 + P31) + ( > 1 - Sqrt[2] + i)/4*(P10 - P11)*(P20 + P21)*(P30 - P31) + ( > 1 + (Sqrt[2] - 1) i)/4*(P10 + P11)*(P20 - P21)*(P30 - P31) > > I know that they are equal because when I use Expand[expression3], I > obtain expression1. > > I've tried forcing the simplification by introducing temporary > expressions and back substituting to go from expression1 to e...

atul wrote: > I'm not entirely sure what prompts your anxiety, as I have used several > packages over the years, including Time Series, Wavelet Explorer and > Mathematica Link for Excel. While some functions (from both Time > Series and > Mathematica Link) were incorporated into the kernel over time, updates to > ensure compatibility with new versions of Mathematica were timely and > unobtrusive. > This has not been the case for me and I subscribe to "Premier Service". I must always ask (usually more than once) for updates to the "Mec...

Looking at the sum in more detail: s1[n_] := Sum[x^k*(Gamma[n-k-1/2]*Gamma[k+1/2])/ (Gamma[n-k-1]*Gamma[k+1]),{k,0,n-1}]; Calculating each term separately TableForm[t=Table[(Gamma[n-k-1/2]*Gamma[k+1/2])/(Gamma[n-k-1] *Gamma[k+1]), {n,5},{k,0,n-1}], TableHeadings->{Automatic,Table[i,{i,0,4}]}] Summing each row of the table Tr/@t {0, Pi/2, Pi, (3*Pi)/2, 2*Pi} For example, for n=2, the term for k=0 is ((Gamma[n-k-1/2]*Gamma[k+1/2])/(Gamma[n-k-1]*Gamma[k+1])/. {n->2,k->0}) == Gamma[3/2]*Gamma[1/2]/(Gamma[1]*Gamma[1])== (1/2)*Gamma[...

I would also point out that you can simply copy and paste from your notebook into Word. So you can write your text in Word and produce formulae, graphs, diagrams, figures etc in word. This is what I do. I don't know how editable they are from Word but I have never had a problem > -----Original Message----- > From: bghiggins@ucdavis.edu [mailto:bghiggins@ucdavis.edu] > Subject: Re: mathematica to word > > > Why not simply make a PDF of your notebook. In pdf form, all > gentlesouls at your university can read it using Adobe Reader or > equivalent. Of...

I like this idea. Does the mathematical/algebraic "programming" style scale up to large problems? Are there examples? Or perhaps it doesn't strictly scale, but is better applied judiciously. It could be used to steer a code at a very high level, or conversely, used in the gaps (the Mathematica-in-the-gaps argument). Conventional programming would make up the difference. If indeed mathematical programming is not the silver-bullet paradigm, where should the conventional (though modern) programming be done? Within or without Mathematica? If within, then we've c...

At 03:01 AM 3/30/2004, Matthias.Bode@oppenheim.de wrote: >Hello Steve, hello Marc, > >sorry, I wanted to be concise but was imprecise. > >1. I have music notes (a song) on paper (classical five line system). > >2. I identify (the key) the note(s) and pauses; e.g. "a" (= 440 Hz). (I can >calculate the frequency for each note.) > >3. How to input this information into Mathematica in order to make it *play* >the music? > >4. I do *not* want to write notes in classical notation on paper using >Mathematica. > >5. I used "...

> I completely agree - can you remember who it was who wrote a > "Mathematica book generator" and posted it here - if you can, > I will add a link to it on my site, because that is all that > we seem to have for the foreseeable future! > > I think WRI's approach to documentation is a real mistake. > Newbies must find it almost impossible to get into the > software. Also, some of the new features of 6.0 - such as all > the new capabilities of Import and Export are almost buried > and unusable because of poor, vague, Microsoft-style document...

Hi Pratik, I never get anywhere near academia, but it is clear from postings on MathGroup and many private communications I have had that things could be better with respect to technical computing in education. Specifically, it is not fair that students should be expected to learn technical material and Mathematica, or any other CAS, at the same time. Perhaps students who are in careers using mathematics should have a required one semester Freshman course in Mathematica or the CAS of their choice. They still wouldn't know everything but at least they wouldn't be stumbling o...

On 12 Aug 2005, at 06:08, Alex wrote: > Kozlowski's posting is wrong from a to z. First, the square root of a > complex number has two branches. One is "positive" and the other is > "negative". So, if we cancel square root in the numerator and > denominator, the worst error we can make is in the sign. There is no > way to justify the fact that Mathematica was unable to do the > simplification. > As for the first sentence above I think I should leave it to others to make the judgement whether it applies to my posting more than to ...

John, I was thinking of angular measurement. The following works... Needs["Miscellaneous`Units`"] Convert[(Pi/4)*Radian, �] 45 � but the following, using an approximate value, does not work because Degree immediately multiplies out undoing the conversion. Convert[1.35 Radian, �] 1.35 The ExtendUnits package at my web site fixes this but at the expense of putting a HoldForm on the degree symbol. Needs["Miscellaneous`V4ExtendUnits`"] 1.35 Radian // ToUnit[�] % // FullForm 77.3493 � Times[77.34930234266115`, HoldForm[Degree]] Since I generally...

Bob, This may be slightly tangential to your question but I hope it will be useful. First, learn how to use Sections, Subsections etc., in Mathematica notebooks. Then, when working on some project or studying some text, make an Initialization Section in your notebooks where you load all the packages you need and do other standard initializations, and make a Routines section where you put routines that you have developed as you work along. Whenever you come across something that will be generally useful in your work, develop it and then move it to the Routines Section. Make t...

On 30 Nov 2005, at 14:07, Narasimham wrote: > Jens-Peer Kuska wrote: > >> it can't work because f [0] ==1 given in your differential equation >> f ' [0]==f [1] and NDSolve[] can't find the value for >> f[1] until it has integrated the equation. > > ??? > >> The nested dependence is equivalent to an infinite >> system of ordinary differential equations and it seems to be >> hard to do this by a finte computer. > > I cannot understand this. In the following two examples the first one > works, not the second. > > Clear[x,f,EQ]; > EQ={f'[x] == f[Cos[x]],f[0]== 1}; > NDSolve[EQ,f,{x,0,4}]; > f[x_]=f[x]/.First[%]; > Plot[f[x],{x,0,4}]; > > Clear[x,f,EQ]; > EQ={f'[x] == Cos[f[x]],f[0]== 1}; > NDSolve[EQ,f,{x,0,4}]; > f[x_]=f[x]/.First[%]; > Plot[f[x],{x,0,4}]; Surely, you mean the second one works, the first one does not!? Also, I think I agree with Jens. These cases are quite different and the problem he mentione does not arise in the second case. Ine the second case the derivative at a point x is defined only in terms of the value of the function at x. Thus values of the function, it's derivative, function etc, can be computed sequentially. In the first case, however, in order to compute the derivative at x you need to know the value of the function at Cos[x], which in general will not be known yet. This ...

About Mathematica language issues and predictability : i=5 Print[++i * ++i] will always return 42 as Print[++i * i++] will always return 36. And it's predictable and will always return these values. In ISO C9x a construction like : int i=5; printf("%d",++i * ++i); is unpredictable. It may return 0 , -45621245 or even 42 ! Such a construction is not forbidden but inpredictable (cf C99 Rationale V5.10). I think in Mathematica it shoudln't be allowed at all. Of course who wants to Print[++i * i--] ? Jean-Michel Fred Simons wrote: > The discu...

on 08/14/03 5:07 AM, Lot-o-fun at lotofun@hotmail.com wrote: >> Seems as if what you really want is an X11 front end. Then you do as >> 'normal', i.e., fire up the local front end and have it talk to the kernel >> on the Mac. Unless you're really wanting the Mac to be sending the >> window/graphics info, i.e. run an X11 front end on the Mac but have it >> display on the other machine. In that case, I'm completely clueless (though >> my guess is that it can't be done that way). > > An X11 front end that runs on the Mac ...

On 19 Dec 2004, at 20:15, Maxim wrote: > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:36:01 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Kozlowski > <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl> wrote: > >> >> On 17 Dec 2004, at 19:20, Maxim wrote: >> >>> In[5]:= >>> Unevaluated[1 + 1]*2 >>> 2*Unevaluated[1 + 1] >>> >>> Out[5]= >>> 4 >>> >>> Out[6]= >>> 2*Unevaluated[1 + 1] >>> >> >> This is not a glitch but works exactly as one woudl expect. You can >> see the difference and the reason by looking at T...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Pein [mailto:petsie@dordos.net] > Sent: 07 December 2006 11:26 > To: mathgroup@smc.vnet.net > Subject: Re: General--Mathematica and Subversion > > Chris Chiasson schrieb: > > Subversion is really nice. On Gentoo, it has a fairly easy > repository > > install - probably true on other distros as well. For some reason, > > Workbench seems faster than regular Eclipse - even with "the same" > > plugins installed (I imagine Eclipse comes with a lot of > stuff that is >...

Hi Sean, From a brief look, the GUIKit application looks pretty great. The reason the cell keeps executing is because it is using GUIRunModal. This keeps running until you close the graph window by clicking it off. Then the latest results are returned to the notebook. David Park djmp@earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/ From: sean kim [mailto:sean_incali@yahoo.com] I'm having difficulties running this kit. If i evaluate a function from the kit, liker grapheditor, it show the window for editing graphs. but the kernel doesn't stop evaluating. maybe it&...

Many thanks to all, that helped! Urijah: you are right about "time frame", it is skipping some fraction and saving a frame. So I get a certain number of frames out of the video. Robert Robert Pigeon TZ = -5 -----Message d'origine----- De : Urijah Kaplan [mailto:uak@sas.upenn.edu] Envoy� : Monday, January 29, 2007 03:56 � : mathgroup@smc.vnet.net Objet : Re: Movie clips to Mathematica I don't think Mathematica can import video. I suggest you use a program like VirtualDub that can save a video clip to image bitmaps. It even has a command line versi...

Kazimir's explanation is not quite right. 0.14 is machine-precision, not 2-digit precision, so 4209/0.14 is also machine-precision (53 binary digits, or about 16 decimal digits, on my machine). Otherwise, Kazimir's explanation is correct. Machine precision is less than 100, so N[..,100] has no effect. The result is machine precision, and default display for machine precision numbers is six digits (on my machine), even though there are 16 that it could display. DrBob www.eclecticdreams.net -----Original Message----- From: Per R�nne [mailto:spam@husumtoften.invalid]...

... An equivalent definition is that a language L is in if and only if it can be written in the form ^ Sarah Mocas, Separating classes in the exponential-time ...

Vivek Wadhwa is Vice President of Academics and Innovation at Singularity University; Fellow, Arthur & Toni Rembe Rock Center for Corporate Governance, ...

... lender is about to ramp up for an attack on banks' highly-profitable personal lending books, SocietyOne has hired the architect of the exponential ...

Meteorologists have gone from forecasting three days of weather to forecasting 25. New technology makes that possible.

Tom Carden Windows XP is really old, and we would suggest that you don't use it unless you really have no option. For the most part, however, ...

... of writing something, I am going to promote something. My partner Albert turned me onto Azeem Azhar ‘s weekly newsletter called The Exponential ...

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 at 12:36 am and is filed under Burkean bells , Good News For Conservatives . You can follow ...

Shares of Cisco Systems (CSCO) are up 3 cents at $21.82, as a rumor apparently makes the round the company is considering buying fiber optics ...

Haskell is a language deeply rooted in category theory. But as you don’t need to study the root system of Vitis vinifera in order to enjoy a ...

TrackingPoint Announces Exponential Growth For 2014 Company Restructures To Streamline Operations and Accelerate Growth PR Newswire PFLUGERVILLE, ...

Resources last updated: 3/16/2016 4:47:52 AM