2018-12-20 08:02:02 -0600 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2018-12-20 08:02:02 -0600 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2016-11-29 09:42:42 -0600 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2016-08-10 02:09:36 -0600 | commented answer | Symbolic calculations in finite field extension Should I have asked another question for this? |

2016-08-07 05:41:55 -0600 | commented answer | Symbolic calculations in finite field extension I accepted this answer because, well, it fully answers my question. But now I must ask for what would truly be the cherry on top of the cake: is there any way to group the result by 'x'? I.e. to make the result of your example look like |

2016-08-07 03:26:06 -0600 | received badge | ● Scholar (source) |

2016-08-06 05:39:12 -0600 | commented answer | Symbolic calculations in finite field extension This is most helpful, but there is a detail still missing: what I wanted is a way for a0, a1 and a2 to be treated as generic elements of GF(2). Meaning for example, that $a_i^n=a_i$ and $a_i+a_i = 0$. Without this, the resulting expression is needlessly complicated. Can it be achieved? |

2016-08-06 05:36:13 -0600 | received badge | ● Supporter (source) |

2016-08-04 22:21:57 -0600 | received badge | ● Student (source) |

2016-08-04 14:40:00 -0600 | asked a question | Symbolic calculations in finite field extension Hello, Please consider the following code snippet: This works as expected, when I have tried to do it using symbolic variables, but they always belong to the Symbolic Ring, which (as far as I can tell) does not mix with other rings. Because this example is small, I was able to do the computations by hand; the value of having SAGE doing it is of course, to apply it to cases that are infeasible to do without a computer. Thank you very much in advance. |

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.