2020-11-18 10:43:58 -0600 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2020-11-12 07:27:12 -0600 | commented answer | assignment vs. subs() I should add that Jordan_form transforms of polynomials are not Taylor/polynomial representable. Which, to me, is still a mystery. |

2020-11-12 07:21:44 -0600 | received badge | ● Enthusiast |

2020-11-11 16:22:14 -0600 | commented answer | assignment vs. subs() Okay, but I am doing things that I don't know will fit in QQ. For instance: Where H is lower triangular singular; (i.e.) the creation matrix. Substituting H for t in a variety of formulas; in particular "Scheffer sequence" generating functions. |

2020-11-11 09:49:34 -0600 | asked a question | assignment vs. subs() What am I missing? I can assign "t=H" but subs(t=H) errors out. |

2020-10-17 17:00:38 -0600 | asked a question | %display latex vs. ipywidgets This is part informational and part a question of style
In Sage Manifolds, which everybody knows, but a more insidious thing is that it breaks |

2020-10-09 08:05:06 -0600 | received badge | ● Self-Learner (source) |

2020-10-09 08:05:06 -0600 | received badge | ● Teacher (source) |

2020-10-08 15:40:27 -0600 | answered a question | row of multiple selection checkboxes This format works but I am having a small problem with "f()" argument passing, I can't seem to make it a dummy argument. The ipywidgets page that has instructions and examples is: https://www.kaggle.com/atorabi/intro-... |

2020-09-26 09:08:36 -0600 | asked a question | row of multiple selection checkboxes I would like to have the multiple selection checkboxes below in a row instead of a column. I did search around and didn't come up with anything obvious. As well as knowing how to do it; what resource should I have looked at? |

2020-09-07 07:34:26 -0600 | commented answer | Typo in Sagemanifolds worksheet ? Okay, I see |

2020-09-04 08:59:16 -0600 | asked a question | Typo in Sagemanifolds worksheet ? Sorry to bother the group but I don't know how to report a technical (but inconsequential) typo in Kerr_Schild.ipynb
Where should I report it?
After In[33] or so, "Check of the Identity" |

2020-09-04 07:05:53 -0600 | received badge | ● Commentator |

2020-09-04 07:05:53 -0600 | commented answer | Latex (?)--Riemann tensor overflow Thanks, I was just wondering if this was a bad sign of a coding error :) Turns out I can always drop it into Lyx; although it does run off the "page" :) |

2020-09-03 16:45:04 -0600 | asked a question | Latex (?)--Riemann tensor overflow While running Kerr_Schild.ipynb I get a bad output; not necessarily incorrect. I copied the TeX to a LaTeX GUI editor and it looks right. When the last expression is evaluated it outputs TeX instead of LaTeX image. It is very long so it might just be a converter problem; that I can ignore. After the leadin the expression: Well I can't attach a trimmed file but I can provide a Dropbox link if needed. The above expression was added just after the "Kerr Metric" paragraph; about line 13. Is this my machine or LaTeX or Jupyter ? |

2020-07-11 07:22:51 -0600 | commented answer | isympy/sympy sagemath integration ? Thanks I am trying the answer(s) to your question! |

2020-07-11 07:10:51 -0600 | commented answer | How to wrap a sympy function as a sage function ? This is what I have asked elsewhere. Apparently the sympy "integrate()" function has functionality that Sagemath hasn't implemented; even with 'algorithm = "sympy" ' . In addition, "from sympy import * " changes the syntax of Sagemath "integrate" including limit formatting. |

2020-07-10 07:20:56 -0600 | commented answer | isympy/sympy sagemath integration ? Why should I reimplement lerchphi() when I can just import sympy? Originally I was just wondering if there was a documentation error in Sagemath. And now, I don't understand the naming crosstalk! |

2020-07-10 07:11:45 -0600 | commented answer | isympy/sympy sagemath integration ? Well this is interesting and getting more complicated. I was running in Jupyter Sagemath 9.1 and after works fine; expected symbol and answer. So I brought up a shell and typed Sage. (to get the Sage: prompt. ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ SageMath version 9.0, Release Date: 2020-01-01 │ │ Using Python 3.8.2. Type "help()" for help. │ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ And using your code and import sympy , all I get is NameError: name 'sympy' is not defined BTW: running Jupyter in a new notebook with Python also fails :) |

2020-07-09 15:06:01 -0600 | asked a question | isympy/sympy sagemath integration ? I'm trying to integrate With sympy; which succeeds in isympy. But I need to separately import sympy Works, whereas simple fails when the import is missing. It also fails (differently) after the import :) only works. I didn't see that mentioned. |

2019-10-14 06:44:09 -0600 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |

2019-10-12 12:21:10 -0600 | commented answer | Hypergeometric Bug? Really?? (sigh) this type of thing is why I always double-check symbolic/numeric algebra packages (:(: and have to write "shells" (incidently it's wrong). |

2019-10-07 01:31:17 -0600 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2019-10-06 09:16:19 -0600 | asked a question | Hypergeometric Bug? The following code shows a (typical ?) failure. F([m,a,b;m,c;z) should and does for positive m; cancel m. but when m is negative "0" is declared prematurely --Juptyter code -- produces --Whereas Maxima code -- Produces -- |

2019-07-12 10:16:33 -0600 | marked best answer | "mesh=" juypter vs. -notebook Perhaps I should send this to some devel or support group ? Comes up and executes: Correctly. Whereas: Fails with miscellaneous assertion type errors.
sagemath 7.3 in both cases. Edit (slelievre): I confirm I can observe this also with Sage 7.4. Here is the error message I get: |

2019-07-12 10:14:08 -0600 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2019-07-01 11:25:06 -0600 | commented question | Can SAGE generate embedded Kerr spacetime dynamic diagrams? I am also interested in a similar thing. I posted a question at: https://math.stackexchange.com/questi... My take is slightly different but if an answer is not forthcoming, are you interested in a joint project? |

2019-05-21 18:57:30 -0600 | commented answer | tangent space vector mapping Great! and thanks :) That in fact corresponds to usage/pullback of T_p vector I remember. I have looked around on the web in the last day and there seem's to be some obstacles to just yanking in down in general. One place has a greater than 1-page proof that it can sometimes be done. Yet another preconception too examine (: |

2019-05-21 17:57:09 -0600 | received badge | ● Scholar (source) |

2019-05-21 17:56:56 -0600 | received badge | ● Supporter (source) |

2019-05-21 17:00:48 -0600 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2019-05-20 10:47:33 -0600 | asked a question | tangent space vector mapping Very simple question. 2) Taking : v = Tp.an_element(); print(v) |

2018-02-20 04:26:42 -0600 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2017-01-07 17:03:28 -0600 | commented answer | solve maxima? You are saying that sagemath can't give multiple solutions? Or is maxima wrong? In other words: what is the semantic difference between solve in sagemath and maxima? I know that maxima doesn't always find all the answers but I haven't had it give me a wrong one. I do know that underdetermined equation sets yield parametric or multiple solutions. |

2016-12-24 09:28:49 -0600 | asked a question | solve maxima? The following in Jupyter (and sage cloud) produces the wrong output. I do have an (extremely similar) maxima batch file that works fine. I sort of presume that maxima "solve" is not really called. If needed I can provide all files and stuff; either link or inline. Or if the correct way to use maxima/solve isn't obvious I can shorten up the generation of the solve argument by direct assignment. The last commented line is to prove that simpler problems yield the correct same answers in sagemath and maxima; when sagemath feels like. jupyter: %display latex T D-Beq1=k[0,0]; eq2=k[0,1]; eq3=k[1,0]; eq4=k[1,1]; eqd=A C-1 M/r)==0,eq4-1==0,eqd==0],[A,B,C,D]); eqd sol=solve([eq1+m==0,eq3-sqrt(2 sol ## -comment---solve([eq1+m==0,eq3-sqrt(2*M/r)==0],[A,B])Produces: Whereas : a maxima script produces ${\left[ \left[ A=-1 , B={{\sqrt{2} \cdot r \cdot \sqrt{{{M}\over{r}}}}\over{r-2\cdot M}} , C=0 , D=-1 \right] , \left[ A=1 , B=-{{\sqrt{2} \cdot r \cdot \sqrt{{{M}\over{r}}}}\over{r-2\cdot M}}, C=0 , D=1 \right] \right] }$ |

2016-12-12 10:01:39 -0600 | answered a question | quadraticform rational_diagonal_form? Q.matrix() ( i.e. the .matrix() operation) returns |

2016-12-12 09:34:50 -0600 | asked a question | quadraticform rational_diagonal_form? I don't understand the factor of "2" ; which also appears in my real problem. Here is the sample code from doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/quadratic_forms/sage/quadratic_forms/quadratic_form.html#sage.quadratic_forms.quadratic_form.QuadraticForm.rational_diagonal_form but Off by a factor of 2? The description says. Ray |

2016-11-30 10:10:06 -0600 | received badge | ● Student (source) |

2016-11-30 09:07:13 -0600 | commented question | "mesh=" juypter vs. -notebook Ignoring some installation differences and using strace: the "sage -notebook" path is ".../repl/rich_output/" whereas "sage -n jupyter" , like above and on my installation, is ".../repl/display/" although I haven't run strace in this case and just looked at the debug output. If it would help, I can make some straces available in dropbox; they are tediously long though. Or some way to control the /repl/xxx routing/option ?? |

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.