20210430 12:51:49 +0200  received badge  ● Notable Question (source) 
20200428 00:24:43 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20190808 19:05:22 +0200  received badge  ● Nice Answer (source) 
20161102 22:20:04 +0200  received badge  ● Nice Answer (source) 
20161102 22:20:04 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20160406 13:18:21 +0200  received badge  ● Good Question (source) 
20151111 18:46:15 +0200  received badge  ● Great Answer (source) 
20150804 14:18:28 +0200  received badge  ● Nice Answer (source) 
20150227 08:19:34 +0200  received badge  ● Guru (source) 
20150227 08:19:34 +0200  received badge  ● Great Answer (source) 
20140629 03:14:50 +0200  marked best answer  Using Sage Symbolic Functions in Scipy fsolve I need to find the roots of a system of multivariate nonlinear (algebraic) functions and Sage's The documentation for Scipy's As a toy example, I've tried the following: It seems like the naive approach but I'm receiving the error 
20140629 03:14:49 +0200  marked best answer  Linking to ATLAS/BLAS in Cython I've been using GSL's CBLAS for performing "fast" matrixvector arithmetic in a Cython script but I've been told that ATLAS' CBLAS is faster by a couple of factors. However, I'm having trouble locating the ATLAS libraries and headers in Edit: I found in 
20140629 03:14:43 +0200  marked best answer  Differentiating Complex Conjugated Functions This is primarily a question of understanding the syntax of some output although there might be a bug hidden underneath. Consider the following code: The answer is supposed to be $d/dx(q\bar{q}) = q_x \bar{q} + q \bar{q}_x$. The second term in the Sage output is correct but I'm having trouble deciphering the first term. Any thoughts? I think I can narrow down the differences even further. Check it out: The independence of order isn't the issue: $q = u + iv$ means that $q_x = u_x + iv_x$, $\bar{q} = u  iv$. So $\bar{q_x} = u_x  iv_x$ and $(\bar{q})_x = (u  iv)_x = u_x  iv_x$. 
20140504 09:46:28 +0200  received badge  ● Popular Question (source) 
20131224 15:51:15 +0200  received badge  ● Famous Question (source) 
20131205 16:58:02 +0200  received badge  ● Notable Question (source) 
20130917 11:03:38 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20130506 20:45:13 +0200  received badge  ● Taxonomist 
20130422 21:48:12 +0200  received badge  ● Famous Question (source) 
20121018 11:03:22 +0200  received badge  ● Popular Question (source) 
20120620 16:09:28 +0200  received badge  ● Notable Question (source) 
20120607 11:26:35 +0200  received badge  ● Famous Question (source) 
20120219 00:16:58 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20120129 00:50:09 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20120129 00:50:09 +0200  received badge  ● Nice Answer (source) 
20120129 00:50:09 +0200  received badge  ● Great Answer (source) 
20120117 08:15:13 +0200  marked best answer  Differentiating Complex Conjugated Functions It looks like Sage is (incorrectly? naively?) applying the chain rule to Ginac (and hence Pynac) does not appear to support doing this  see this. However, presumably one could implement a trivial conjugation to the 
20120117 08:11:54 +0200  marked best answer  Using Sage Symbolic Functions in Scipy fsolve The original scenario involves two variables and only one equation. Because Here is a more compact version using lambda functions and the trick described link:here Since you said you have a large number of variables and equations, here is a slightly more "scalefriendly" approach (but somewhat kludgy): In all cases, the result should look like:

20120112 09:59:23 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20120112 09:59:23 +0200  received badge  ● Nice Answer (source) 
20120109 04:58:38 +0200  received badge  ● Notable Question (source) 
20111026 09:35:15 +0200  received badge  ● Notable Question (source) 
20110907 16:25:16 +0200  received badge  ● Popular Question (source) 
20110801 11:42:33 +0200  received badge  ● Popular Question (source) 
20110725 15:32:42 +0200  received badge  ● Great Answer (source) 
20110711 19:51:38 +0200  received badge  ● Popular Question (source) 
20110711 13:22:46 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20110630 12:15:47 +0200  answered a question  Running PARI/GP and Sage Running won't work since This will actually substitute the values 
20110624 20:05:44 +0200  received badge  ● Good Answer (source) 
20110603 16:25:06 +0200  edited answer  Replace part of expression Alternatively, you can write your expression out using Sympy, a symbolics package that's included with Sage. (Sympy Documentation) Note that Sympy correctly identifies that You can now treat Note that we didn't have to convert EDIT: You can convert a Sympy expression back to a Sage symbolic expression by doing the following: 
20110603 15:44:58 +0200  commented answer  How to change _latex_ of log to \ln ? No worries. I think kcrisman's answer is at least starting to head in the direction of what you're looking for. 
20110603 13:59:49 +0200  answered a question  How to change _latex_ of log to \ln ? I'm not exactly sure how this is a Sage question but in your LaTeX preamble you can write so that whenever you write " 
20110603 13:27:27 +0200  commented answer  Export to C code Very interesting. I know that some of the Sympy folks have been involved with f2py, a Fortran to Python wrapping utility. Quite interesting that they have a C codegen as well! 
20110602 19:48:44 +0200  commented answer  Export to C code Which link are you talking about? They work fine for me. 
20110528 18:20:12 +0200  received badge  ● Enlightened (source) 