ASKSAGE: Sage Q&A Forum - Latest question feedhttps://ask.sagemath.org/questions/Q&A Forum for SageenCopyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license.Tue, 19 Jan 2021 19:58:40 -0600How do I understand the result of symbolic integralshttps://ask.sagemath.org/question/7574/how-do-i-understand-the-result-of-symbolic-integrals/So now I know how to integrate, but when I type in
sage: deriv=diff((exp(x)-1)/x,x); deriv
e^x/x - (e^x - 1)/x^2
sage: deriv.integrate(x)
-1/x + Ei(x) - gamma(-1, -x)
why don't I get back `(exp(x)-1)/x +C `?
Philipp SchneiderWed, 18 Aug 2010 13:04:12 -0500https://ask.sagemath.org/question/7574/Possible inconsistency in symbolic limitshttps://ask.sagemath.org/question/55370/possible-inconsistency-in-symbolic-limits/I was trying to manipulate some symbolic expressions and got an unexpected error.
Here is a minimal example,
u=integrate(x**3/(exp(x)-1),(x,0,oo))
The expression is quite messy, but the result is known. When I try to use any simplification routine, like
u.simplify()
sage displays the error message
RuntimeError: ECL says: Error executing code in Maxima: limit: direction must be either 'plus' or 'minus'; found: _SAGE_VAR_minus
As far I understood, the expression is defining lateral limits by symbolic variables, while maxima handle such limits as strings. If it is the case there is an internal conflict here. Is it the case?cav_rtTue, 19 Jan 2021 19:58:40 -0600https://ask.sagemath.org/question/55370/Two ways of integrating x↦xⁿsin(x) give contradictory results. Bug?https://ask.sagemath.org/question/36185/two-ways-of-integrating-x-xnsinx-give-contradictory-results-bug/**First way:**
var('x,n')
integral(x^n*sin(x),x)
gives just
integrate(x^n*sin(x), x)
not very informative, let us try to add an assumption to get nicer results.
**Second way:**
assume(n,'integer')
integral(x^n*sin(x),x)
gives
1/4*(((-1)^n - 1)*gamma(n + 1, I*x) - ((-1)^n - 1)*gamma(n + 1, -I*x))*(-1)^(-1/2*n)
Uhm, looks better, but... wait, isn't `(-1)^n-1` equal to `0` for even values of `n` ? That would make the whole thing equal to `0` for even `n`.
I = integral(x^n*sin(x),x)
for k in range(10):
print I.subs(n==2*k)
prints only `0`s. Weird, non-zero functions should not have zero integrals.
**Third way :**
Let us try to do the integration with particular values of `n`.
for n in range(5):
print integral(x^n*sin(x),x)
prints
-cos(x)
-x*cos(x) + sin(x)
-(x^2 - 2)*cos(x) + 2*x*sin(x)
-(x^3 - 6*x)*cos(x) + 3*(x^2 - 2)*sin(x)
Looks better, but is clearly different from the previous answer.
**Question:**
I am working on the cloud, with SageMath 7.4 kernel. Is this a bug or did I misunderstood the meaning of the `'integer'`assumption ?
If this is a bug, how should I report it, is posting this question here enough ?
P.S. I did read the [wiki page about reporting bugs](http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/trac.html#reporting-bugs), but, gosh, is it really necessary to have a google account in order to report a bug ? Both sage-devel and sage-support are on Google Groups. lbWed, 04 Jan 2017 14:44:16 -0600https://ask.sagemath.org/question/36185/