2020-04-16 09:57:31 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2019-12-11 14:36:16 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |

2019-05-09 03:08:21 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2018-12-24 08:32:46 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2018-12-03 10:47:34 -0500 | received badge | ● Good Answer (source) |

2018-03-26 03:23:31 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2017-10-19 12:26:12 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2017-08-24 10:56:46 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2017-08-24 01:34:04 -0500 | answered a question | collect variables buried in an expression It sometimes helps to expand and factor: |

2017-08-24 01:21:27 -0500 | commented answer | Sage not returning roots of polynomimal sage: print([SQ[i*2][0].minpoly().degree() for i in range(16)]) [32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32] |

2017-08-23 08:50:31 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2017-06-11 03:04:59 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2017-04-29 17:52:00 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2017-02-11 06:52:42 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2016-11-08 10:43:16 -0500 | commented question | What is the problem with that integral ? Simplification: |

2016-11-04 17:32:57 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2016-11-04 09:43:20 -0500 | answered a question | Use cumulative distribution functions Using the actual function I get a fine plot via: For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log-nor... |

2016-11-04 09:23:56 -0500 | commented answer | Use cumulative distribution functions Then at the moment you need to create your function in mathematical terms. Please see and rate my answer. |

2016-04-03 00:19:24 -0500 | commented question | Memory saturation when I test equalities in symbolic ring. Or before. I also cannot confirm with 7.2.beta2 |

2016-03-08 14:04:58 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2016-01-27 08:13:42 -0500 | received badge | ● Necromancer (source) |

2015-10-24 09:24:08 -0500 | commented answer | qepcad failing to replicate examples qepcad did install here on 6.10.p1 after I set my MAKE to |

2015-10-19 01:38:53 -0500 | answered a question | does SAGE compute Pi using Chudnovsky algorithm? Sage uses the mpfr library to compute pi to arbitrary precision. The mpfr algorithm apparently has a limit of 646456992 digits. Please refer to https://github.com/epowers/mpfr/blob/... Not sure if that is up-to-date, however. |

2015-10-15 01:35:31 -0500 | answered a question | sage doesn't evaluate Use |

2015-10-14 08:52:53 -0500 | commented answer | Plot doesn't seem to evaluate my function That's a bug that already has a fix which just needs to be reviewed: http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9424 |

2015-10-04 08:00:02 -0500 | answered a question | simplify_rational gives different results Your Operator precedence in Sage closely follows the same in Python (but in C++ for example the dot would have behaved the same way). |

2015-10-04 03:26:53 -0500 | commented question | Multivariate Laurent series This is right.Multivariate Laurent series are not implemented in Sage at the moment. |

2015-09-27 09:39:58 -0500 | commented answer | simplify sqrt(x/y^2)*y A fix should be possible with pynac-0.4.x (pynac is part of Sage); pynac git master already does |

2015-09-26 01:48:38 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2015-09-25 02:16:08 -0500 | commented answer | Understanding the 'solve()' result with braces and brackets ("([{x:z},{x:y}],[1,1])") The |

2015-09-21 02:50:22 -0500 | commented answer | simplify sqrt(x/y^2)*y Miguel, note that sqrt(x^2) != x for x<0. |

2015-09-15 08:20:27 -0500 | commented question | High memory usage when substituting variables Maybe http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17494 is related. In any case the output of |

2015-09-15 08:05:15 -0500 | commented question | High memory usage when substituting variables I confirm the steady increase. This is not reduced by |

2015-09-15 07:41:34 -0500 | answered a question | Understanding the 'solve()' result with braces and brackets ("([{x:z},{x:y}],[1,1])") The result consists of two lists: |

2015-09-09 01:17:18 -0500 | answered a question | Forcing Symbolic Variables to Always be Real First, with the newest versions of Sage the domain you create a variable with is propagated to the assumption database so you can say: I am not sure how you get to the output you give, I got: Also, you say that the derivative should be zero. But that's only the case if s is a constant, no? |

2015-08-27 02:01:40 -0500 | answered a question | Inverses of matrices of Laurent polynomials This is defined behaviour of the general inverse, as far as I understand from the code. For example, The definition of I'm not an algebraist so no comment on that but, with symbolics you would stay in the ring, so symbolics seems to be good for something, contrary to many a belief. |

2015-08-21 08:41:52 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Answer (source) |

2015-08-21 01:28:29 -0500 | commented question | (Unexpanded) symbolic inequalities yield erroneous results This was fixed in one of the 6.8 betas so 6.8 or 6.9 should be fine. |

2015-08-08 04:06:06 -0500 | commented answer | Simplify result of this definite integral That's not an anwer fitting in this forum. |

Copyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.