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 ...

Version 5.0 gives different answers with NIntegrate and Integrate. However, if you load the package Calculus`Integration, then both give the same answer. In[1]:= $Version Out[1]= 5.0 for Microsoft Windows (November 18, 2003) In[2]:= Integrate[Max[x,y],{x,0,1},{y,0,1}] Out[2]= \!\(1\/3\) In[3]:= NIntegrate[Max[x,y],{x,0,1},{y,0,1}] Out[3]= 0.666667 In[4]:= In[5]:= <<Calculus`Integration` In[6]:= Integrate[Max[x,y],{x,0,1},{y,0,1}] Out[6]= \!\(2\/3\) In[7]:= NIntegrate[Max[x,y],{x,0,1},{y,0,1}] Out[7]= 0.666667 Reagards! Jos� Luis -----Mensaje ori...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Steven T. Hatton [mailto:hattons@globalsymmetry.com] > Sent: 15 December 2005 10:30 > Subject: Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming > in Mathematica > ....... > > I wonder what value there woudl be in trying to explain what makes > > Mathematica "functions" different from functions in > languages such as > > C in a book addressed to readers most of whom have no > knowledge of C > > and are not particualry interested in getting it? > > I suspect you will not fi...

I think most people this entire discussion does not have any practical importance. Obviously something like this: 2*Unevaluated[1+1] 2 Unevaluated[1+1] is extremly unlikely to have any practical use. After all, we use Unevaluated when we want something to remain unevaluated, whereas here only two things can happen: either one will be left with Unevaluated[something] or the "something" will evaluate. Both of these outcomes are obsiously undesirable. Why should one ever use anything like this in a program? In fact if for some unimaginable reason somone neede...

In version 6 I do not see a problem with the first two examples. In the third example, l is undefined. Defining l and changing 3.7 to 37/10 (use rational numbers to maintain high precision) works fine. Alternatively, specify higher precision (e.g., 3.7`25). Also, in version 6, Plot has an option to change (increase) the WorkingPrecision. Bob Hanlon ---- John Ralston <ralston@ku.edu> wrote: > LegendreP[ l, m] and SphericalHarmonicY[ t, p, l, m] go > wrong for large index l . > > For l> 40 or so neither can be used reliably everywhere. > > To see t...

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... &...

This is a precision issue. Use greater precision or rationalize the argument . LegendreP[200, 43, 4/5] // N 2.9256424676613492*^97 LegendreP[200, 43, 0.8`50] 2.92564246766126564673216*10^97 Bob Hanlon ---- Roman <rschmied@gmail.com> wrote: > I confirm the problem. Just as an example, > > In[1] := LegendreP[200, 43, 4/5] // N > Out[1] = 2.9256424676613492`*^97 > > In[2] := LegendreP[200, 43, 0.8] > Out[2] = 6.151579920980095`*^118 > > give strikingly different results! (The former result is accurate.) > > It seems that t...

Sorry again, but your previous message said >=, not <=. It's still posted on Google Groups, and I checked to make sure. DrBob www.eclecticdreams.net -----Original Message----- From: AGUIRRE ESTIBALEZ Julian [mailto:mtpagesj@lg.ehu.es] Subject: RE: Re: Mandelbrot Set & Mathematica On Tue, 11 May 2004, DrBob wrote: > Sorry, but that just doesn't work, even after changing =BE to >=. There are > only two colors (even using your rainbow function), and no fractal > "antennae". As noted in a previous message, it should be "<=...

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 ...

On Fri, 22 May 2009 01:50:51 -0400 (EDT), skkaul wrote: > On May 10, 5:13 am, John Fultz <jfu...@wolfram.com> wrote: > >> <install= >> directory>/SystemFiles/FrontEnd/TextResources/UnicodeFontMapping.tr >> > Besides the comments, is there any documentation on this file? In > particular, what are type V and H entries, and what font is referenced > by -2? > > Thanks, > Shiva It's not documented because it's not intended for user consumption, although being able to edit it very rarely allows working around certain issues...

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, dh wrote: > Hi APC, > I tried to simplify the problem a bit. There is definitly a bug that > Wolfram should take notice. It would be nice if WRI could give an answer . > > The folllowing is obviously correct: > Sum[Sin[k]*Cos[k + 1], {k, 1, 1}] > Out: Cos[2] Sin[1] > > When we do the same with indefinite summation: > Sum[Sin[k]*Cos[k + 1], {k, 1, n}] /. n -> 1 // Simplify // Expand > Out: Sin[1]/2 + Cos[2] Sin[1] > > we get an additional term: Sin[1]/2 !!! > > Sincerely, Daniel > > APC wrote: &g...

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 01:00:12 -0500 (EST), J=E1nos wrote: > > > On Feb 13, 2008, at 4:04 AM, David Park wrote: > >> But be aware that if you are buying a new computer, from Dell at >> least, and >> you specify a 64 bit microprocessor, you will not necessarily get a >> 64 bit >> operating system, and may not even be able to install a 64-bit >> operating >> system. So if you are looking to use 64-bit Mathematica check out very >> carefully before purchase that you will indeed have a 64-bit operating >> system. >>...

For some interesting reading take a look at Chapter 2 in Edward R. Tufte's 'Visual Explanations'. Dr. John Snow found the cause of the 1854 Cholera Epidemic in London by FIRST plotting the case data on a map of London, and THEN doing the analysis. In the case of the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster, although they were aware of the potential problem, the technicians never made the proper graphic that related risk to temperature in past launches and thus failed to present a convincing case for not launching. Maybe graphics doesn't always come before analysis, but ...

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...

The Principia states Newton's laws of motion , forming the foundation of classical mechanics , also Newton's law of universal gravitation , and ...

This was bugging me over the weekend: What is a good way to solve those Where's Waldo? [ 'Wally' outside of North America] puzzles, using Mathematica ...

During the Wolfram Mathematica Virtual Conference 2011, Wolfram founder Stephen Wolfram shared the background and vision of Mathematica, including ...

It would appear that Wolfram, the company behind the Siri search engine is bringing its original product, Mathematica , to the iPad. In response ...

Wolfram Research is giving away its Mathematica software for use on the diminutive, $25 Raspberry Pi computers and debuting a brand-new programming ...

The creator of the answer engine in Siri writes about his long relationship with Jobs Wolfram. Photo: Creative Commons There are a several novel ...

Single biggest jump in new functionality in the software's history

... is being expanded into a logic and knowledge engine that can operate locally or in the cloud. Wolfram Research's flagship program Mathematica ...

[Stephen Wolfram], possibly the only person on Earth who wants a second element named after him, is giving away Mathematica for the Raspberry ...

If you’re a fan of Wolfram’s Mathematica app, you’ll be pleased to hear its comprehensive tools for technical computing are now more accessible. ...

Resources last updated: 2/12/2016 2:29:29 PM