How to make Sage to solve the equation?

618 views
Skip to first unread message

Slava

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 12:00:47 PM1/3/09
to sage-support
When i try to solve this equation:
solve(x^2*log(x, 2) == 1, x);
It answers me:
[x^2 == log(2)/log(x)]
It,s true, but how can i get the numerical value of x?

William Stein

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 6:54:15 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com

sage: plot(x^2*log(x,2)-1, 0,2)
[nice plot so you can understand what is going on]

sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,1, 2)
1.4142135623730951

calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 7:10:24 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
>>
sage: plot(x^2*log(x,2)-1, 0,2)
[nice plot so you can understand what is going on]

sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,1, 2)
1.4142135623730951
<<

Hi, I'm trying out SAGE for the first time, so I entered what you
suggested (see above).

Now, from the plot, it there seems to be no other roots between 0 and 2
so I entered


sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,0, 2)
and got the root = 0.0

what am I missing here?

TIA,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia
Teacher and Professor
Applied Math, Physics and Comp Sci
Baldwin High and Nassau CC

The Calculus and CompSci Project Online!
http://calcpage.tripod.com

-----Original Message-----
From: William Stein <wst...@gmail.com>
To: sage-s...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 6:54 pm
Subject: [sage-support] Re: How to make Sage to solve the equation?



Robert Bradshaw

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 7:18:02 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
On Jan 3, 2009, at 4:10 PM, calc...@aol.com wrote:

> sage: plot(x^2*log(x,2)-1, 0,2)
> [nice plot so you can understand what is going on]
>
> sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,1, 2)
> 1.4142135623730951
> <<
>
> Hi, I'm trying out SAGE for the first time, so I entered what you
> suggested (see above).
>
> Now, from the plot, it there seems to be no other roots between 0
> and 2
> so I entered
>
>
> sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,0, 2)
> and got the root = 0.0
>
> what am I missing here?

This function is not defined at the left endpoint, so you are
probably violating some assumption on the underlying optimization
algorithm used. However, I would much rather have an error here than
an incorrect value.

- Robert

mabshoff

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 7:19:21 PM1/3/09
to sage-support


On Jan 3, 4:10 pm, calcp...@aol.com wrote:
> sage: plot(x^2*log(x,2)-1, 0,2)
> [nice plot so you can understand what is going on]
>
> sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,1, 2)
> 1.4142135623730951
> <<
>
> Hi, I'm trying out SAGE for the first time, so I entered what you
> suggested (see above).
>
> Now, from the plot, it there seems to be no other roots between 0 and 2
> so I entered
>
> sage: find_root(x^2*log(x,2)-1,0, 2)
> and got the root = 0.0
>
> what am I missing here?

Nope, this is issue with numpy likely. For example:

sage: sage: find_root(1/(x-1)+1,0, 2)
0.0
sage: sage: find_root(1/(x-1)+1,0.00001, 2)
1.0000000000011564

It seems that there is trouble when you have a singularity for one of
that starting points. Obviously this needs to be fixed :)


> TIA,
> AJG

Cheers,

Michael

> A. Jorge Garcia
> Teacher and Professor
> Applied Math, Physics and Comp Sci
> Baldwin High and Nassau CC
>
> The Calculus and CompSci Project Online!http://calcpage.tripod.com

calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 7:33:29 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
Exactly, the function log base 2 of x is not defined at 0.
So, why won't sage return some sort of domain error?

I noticed something similar when I plotted (x^2-1)/(x-1) and got the
graph of x+1.
I was hoping for a removeable discontinuity to show in the graph!
IE a hole in y=x+1 at x=1.

TIA,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia
Teacher and Professor
Applied Math and Comp Sci
Baldwin High and Nassau CC
Long Island, NY, USA

mailto:calc...@aol.com
ftp://ftp.baldwinschools.net
http://calcpage.tripod.com/bshs



mabshoff

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 7:48:10 PM1/3/09
to sage-support


On Jan 3, 4:33 pm, calcp...@aol.com wrote:

Hi AJG,

> Exactly, the function log base 2 of x is not defined at 0.
> So, why won't sage return some sort of domain error?

We call numpy for the numerical roots and I guess this might be a bug
there, but we will check. Somebody please open a ticket for this.

> I noticed something similar when I plotted (x^2-1)/(x-1) and got the
> graph of x+1.
> I was hoping for a removeable discontinuity to show in the graph!
> IE a hole in y=x+1 at x=1.

Ouch, I think this might explain the problem:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Sage Version 3.2.3.final, Release Date: 2009-01-02 |
| Type notebook() for the GUI, and license() for information. |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sage: f=(x^2-1)/(x-1); f
(x^2 - 1)/(x - 1)
sage: f.simplify()
(x^2 - 1)/(x - 1)
sage: f.simplify_full()
x + 1
sage:

Not sure is this is an issue with Maxima, but I would guess so.
simplify_full() shouldn't do this since it is clearly mathematically
not equivalent. My suspicion is that we probably call simplify_full()
before plotting and/or feeding it into _fast_float(). Someone please
open another ticket for this one.

> TIA,
> AJG

Cheers,

Michael

> A. Jorge Garcia
> Teacher and Professor
> Applied Math and Comp Sci
> Baldwin High and Nassau CC
> Long Island, NY, USA
>
> mailto:calcp...@aol.comftp://ftp.baldwinschools.nethttp://calcpage.tripod.com/bshs

calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 8:01:13 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
That's another issue: how do I know which package SAGE is using for a
particular task. You mention there may be a problem with maxima or
numpy, how are we to know?

TIA,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia
Teacher and Professor

William Stein

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 8:05:33 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
It's documented in the Maxima documentation, where one finds
"cancelling the greatest common divisor of the numerator and
denominator..." in the docs for ratexpand, which is called in the
course of the above. Who says simplify_full() shouldn't do the above?

Mathematica also does the above simplification:

sage: mathematica.eval('Simplify[(x^2-1)/(x-1)]')
1 + x

I don't think there is any claim that simplify(expr) gives back a 100%
mathematically equivalent expression. However, the types of changes
that occur are well defined.

> My suspicion is that we probably call simplify_full()
> before plotting and/or feeding it into _fast_float(). Someone please
> open another ticket for this one.

I do not think fast_float calls simplify_full.

William

>
>> TIA,
>> AJG
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
>
>> A. Jorge Garcia
>> Teacher and Professor
>> Applied Math and Comp Sci
>> Baldwin High and Nassau CC
>> Long Island, NY, USA
>>
>> mailto:calcp...@aol.comftp://ftp.baldwinschools.nethttp://calcpage.tripod.com/bshs
> >
>



--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org

mabshoff

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 8:06:32 PM1/3/09
to sage-support


On Jan 3, 5:01 pm, calcp...@aol.com wrote:
> That's another issue: how do I know which package SAGE is using for a
> particular task. You mention there may be a problem with maxima or
> numpy, how are we to know?

Well, this can be simple or difficult to find out, but in most cases
some developer will be able to tell you. You can look at the source
code of some operation foo by running foo??

> TIA,
> AJG

Cheers,

Michael

> A. Jorge Garcia
> Teacher and Professor
>
> mailto:calcp...@aol.comftp://ftp.baldwinschools.nethttp://calcpage.tripod.com/bshs

mabshoff

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 8:12:01 PM1/3/09
to sage-support
Well, for me simplification implies equivalence operations. But Maxima
seems to be more careful here than MMA. But then I don't do symbolic
manipulation, but I must say I am very surprised.

> Mathematica also does the above simplification:
>
> sage: mathematica.eval('Simplify[(x^2-1)/(x-1)]')
>          1 + x

That looks plain wrong to me assuming equivalence operations, but
maybe the MMA documentation defines what Simplify does.

> I don't think there is any claim that simplify(expr) gives back a 100%
> mathematically equivalent expression.   However, the types of changes
> that occur are well defined.

Ok. Maybe the Sage documentation ought to make this clearer then.

> > My suspicion is that we probably call simplify_full()
> > before plotting and/or feeding it into _fast_float(). Someone please
> > open another ticket for this one.
>
> I do not think fast_float calls simplify_full.

Ok, but I am curious how this bug happens then. But I am sure someone
more familiar with the plotting code will find out.

> William

Cheers,

Michael

Robert Bradshaw

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 8:44:09 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
On Jan 3, 2009, at 4:33 PM, calc...@aol.com wrote:

> Exactly, the function log base 2 of x is not defined at 0.
> So, why won't sage return some sort of domain error?

Sage doesn't test to see if the function is defined on the whole
domain (if this is even a decidable question in general, and I bet
it's not), it just passes the expression to maxima and/or numpy. Of
course, there is lots of room for improvement, and I don't like the
current behavior.

> I noticed something similar when I plotted (x^2-1)/(x-1) and got the
> graph of x+1.
> I was hoping for a removeable discontinuity to show in the graph!
> IE a hole in y=x+1 at x=1.

If you evaluate (x^2-1)/(x-1) at 100, or even 1000s of random points
say, between 0 and 10, chances are very slim you'll try and evaluate
it at the point x=1. Thus when you interpolate the rest of the graph
it would come out as a straight line. Also, it's unclear how much of
a "hole" you would want to see--mathematically even one pixel would
be too large.

It would be nice to do something more clever than evaluate at a bunch
of points and "connect" the dots, but then there is no end to the
amount of cleverness one could ask for.

- Robert

Calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 3, 2009, 9:08:33 PM1/3/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
In a message dated 1/3/2009 8:44:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, robe...@math.washington.edu writes:
Also, it's unclear how much of 
a "hole" you would want to see--mathematically even one pixel would 
be too large.
Sorry, I suppose I'm spoiled by using the TI-89 graphing calculator, which is based on an app called derive if I'm not mistaken, where these domain issues are handled differently....
 
Thanx for all the info,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia
Teacher & Professor
Applied Math, Physics & CS
Baldwin HS & Nassau CC

calc...@aol.com
cisthe...@aol.com

CALCPAGE: The CALCulus and Computer Science Archive PAGE
http://calcpage.tripod.com

SFFBCLUB: Science Fact & Fiction Book CLUB
Search EBay for "ti active"
Search Ebay for "knoppix slax"
Search EBay for "knoppix quantian"
Search EBay for "knoppix manual"
Search EBay for "fractal art signed numbered"

CISTHETA: The OpenMosix Linux Cluster
http://cistheta2007.deviantart.com

YOUTUBE: APCS Instructional Videos
http://www.youtube.com/cistheta2007

CENTAURI: APCS ftpSite
ftp://centauri.baldwinschools.net
ftp://65.254.7.10
 
 




New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines.

John Cremona

unread,
Jan 4, 2009, 9:26:34 AM1/4/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
2009/1/4 mabshoff <Michael...@mathematik.uni-dortmund.de>:
This gets to the heart of something which has has bugged students and
computer algebra systems from the year dot.

From one point of view, (x^2-1)/(x-1) defines a "rational function" in
one variable, i.e. an element of the field of all rational functions,
denoted CC(x) if the coefficients come from CC (say). In this
algebraic context, the element just defined is the same as the element
x+1 and the simplification is 100% valid.

From another point of view, (x^2-1)/(x-1) is a formula defining a
function of x for all values of x where the function is "defined", so
-- as this is a fraction -- excluding any values where the denominator
evaluates to 0. In that case it defines a function on the punctured
domain where x!=1. In this case, as the original poster remarks, it's
a removable singularity and if we define the function's value at x=1
to be 2 then we get back the function x+1.

Things get much more complicated when there are side conditions (and,
taken to the extreme, would probably lead on to full-scale algebraic
geometry, schemes and all. For example, if you are interested in
functions f(x,y) on the circle x^2+y^2=1, then x/(1-y)=(1+y)/x; the
first expression is "defined" except at (0,1), while the second is
defined except at either (0,1) and (0,-1). There are examples where
no one expression gives you something which is "defined" in the naive
sense everywhere the function is defined.

What this shows is that there is no magic simple solution which will
work and keep everyone happy in all such situations. I think that
cancelling common factors from a fraction is perfectly sensible, even
though it enlarges the domain of definition of the functions. So I am
happy with a computer algebra system simplifying (x^2-1)/(x-1) to x+1.
On the other hand, I know from teaching experience that there are
situations where one would want to keep the two separate.

John

calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 4, 2009, 9:35:15 PM1/4/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
Hi, I see that sage can call mathematica functions - I suppose that
only works if I have mathematica installed.

What I'm wondering is if I can import a mathmatica notebook into sage?
We used to have mathematica at my school and I remember using some very
nice mathematica notebooks by Jerry Uhl (University of Illinois?) that
served as workbooks for teaching calculus. Can I use these notebooks
with sage?

Also, I see that sage uses lots of great FOSS math apps. One I don't
see, and wonder why its not included, is Octave which would give MATLAB
functionality to sage. I'm wondering why Octave is not part of sage?
I thought sage was to be an alternative to Magma, Mathematica and
MATLAB.

TIA,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia
Teacher and Professor
Applied Math and Comp Sci
Baldwin High and Nass CC

William Stein

unread,
Jan 4, 2009, 9:46:56 PM1/4/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 6:35 PM, <calc...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I see that sage can call mathematica functions - I suppose that
> only works if I have mathematica installed.
>
> What I'm wondering is if I can import a mathmatica notebook into sage?
> We used to have mathematica at my school and I remember using some very
> nice mathematica notebooks by Jerry Uhl (University of Illinois?) that
> served as workbooks for teaching calculus. Can I use these notebooks
> with sage?

No.


> Also, I see that sage uses lots of great FOSS math apps. One I don't
> see, and wonder why its not included, is Octave which would give MATLAB
> functionality to sage. I'm wondering why Octave is not part of sage?
> I thought sage was to be an alternative to Magma, Mathematica and
> MATLAB.

1. Sage includes numpy and scipy, which are native Python libraries
that provide most MATLAB functionality to Sage. See, e.g.,
http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
To include Octave as well would be a huge duplication of
functionality. (Sage also includes GSL -- the Gnu Scientific Library
-- which again would overlap a lot with Octave for functionality.)

2. Octave is very time consuming to build from source, since it is a
large C++ program.

3. Octave as a binary is very easy to install on any modern system, so
there is little point in including it in Sage, since people can easily
just install it. There is a Sage/Octave interface, so you can use
Octave from Sage.

4. Octave is licensed GPLv3, so we can't include it with Sage anyways.

-- William

Tim Lahey

unread,
Jan 4, 2009, 10:13:03 PM1/4/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com

On Jan 4, 2009, at 9:35 PM, calc...@aol.com wrote:

>
> Hi, I see that sage can call mathematica functions - I suppose that
> only works if I have mathematica installed.
>
> What I'm wondering is if I can import a mathmatica notebook into sage?
> We used to have mathematica at my school and I remember using some
> very
> nice mathematica notebooks by Jerry Uhl (University of Illinois?) that
> served as workbooks for teaching calculus. Can I use these notebooks
> with sage?
>

You could display the notebooks with Mathematica Player and if you want
to do more with them, try and convert them to Sage.

As for Octave, unless there is something specific, I highly recommend
Numpy and SciPy like William stated.

Cheers,

Tim.

---
Tim Lahey
PhD Candidate, Systems Design Engineering
University of Waterloo
http://www.linkedin.com/in/timlahey

mabshoff

unread,
Jan 5, 2009, 3:29:33 PM1/5/09
to sage-support


On Jan 3, 4:18 pm, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>
wrote:
Since no one opened a ticket yet I made this http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4942
and it is a blocker for 3.3.

Cheers,

Michael

Calc...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 5, 2009, 5:35:53 PM1/5/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
In a message dated 1/4/2009 10:13:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tim....@gmail.com writes:
You could display the notebooks with Mathematica Player and if you want
to do more with them, try and convert them to Sage.
Thanx for the suggestion.  Mathematica Player is an alternative, however, these are supposed to be interactive worksheets.  I suppose my question is, how do I go about converting Mathematica Notebooks into Sage Notebooks?
 
As for Octave, I did not realize all the functionality numpy and scipy provide and how difficult it is to compile Octave, so I can live without Octave for now!
 
TIA,
AJG

A. Jorge Garcia

Teacher & Professor
Applied Math, Physics & CS
Baldwin HS & Nassau CC

William Stein

unread,
Jan 5, 2009, 5:42:00 PM1/5/09
to sage-s...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 2:35 PM, <Calc...@aol.com> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/4/2009 10:13:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> tim....@gmail.com writes:
>
> You could display the notebooks with Mathematica Player and if you want
> to do more with them, try and convert them to Sage.
>
> Thanx for the suggestion. Mathematica Player is an alternative, however,
> these are supposed to be interactive worksheets. I suppose my question is,
> how do I go about converting Mathematica Notebooks into Sage Notebooks?
>

The only way is to rewrite the notebooks from scratch using the
mathematica notebooks as inspiration. The Sage language and
mathematica languages (and capabilities) are distinct.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages