resolvent

563 Reputation

7 Badges

12 years, 320 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by resolvent

I never thought of mod X as a unary operator which RETURNED a value: i.e. 9 mod 5 is 4. I mean, of course, I think that way all the time in MATH, but did not expect that in Maple. I had thought of the mod X as only TESTING equivalence.
Thanks for checking it out. I made an even simpler version of this routine. I asked for help in my newest thread titled "What is wrong with my program?" I know that this is what programming is: stop, ask for help, get help, add another line or 1 change or 1 added level of complexity, get stuck, waste time experimenting, stop, ask for help. It just seems that there should be some more "automatic" way of detecting programming logic errors, analogous to XML editors which point out syntax errors, such as non-closed brackets. In fact, that reminds me of a question on the subject of XML editors which I will ask in another thread.
I want to add 1 to t if and only if t is a certain value mod 4, as shown. But, my program thinks none of these values show up. The final answer should be t = 3 (I think - just did that in my head). Please replace this text with the link to your file. The link can be found in the File Manager View 5348_Mod4SumTest.mw on MapleNet or Download 5348_Mod4SumTest.mw
View file details Also, why would it be impractical? The conference I had in mind was the International Symposium of Symbolic & Algebraic Computation (ISSAC) 2003 held at Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Actually, a subconference of ISSAC2003 called Internet Accessible Mathematical Computation (IAMC), held 2003 August 7. I got the impression that many mathematicians were already seriously working on a unified bank of math theorems at that time. I am curious to see how far they have gotten. After all, if Theorem A + Theorem B lead to Theorem C, then there is no reason why a web-like resource for tracking down these theorems AND there proofs could not be created.
I see nothing on the screen which tells me whether I am in Worksheet or Document mode. I just open with the default, which I believe is Worksheet mode. Also, I have just used the default math mode, which is 2-D. This is how things were set up when I first opened Maple when I first bought it. These are the modes I've stuck to ever since. I've tried playing with the dropdown menu with all the different types of math modes: 2-D, Warning, 2-D Output, Text Output, Error, Diagnostic. I have no idea what those things mean. However, I HAVE noticed that my file always tends to "jump" back into the default 2-D Math mode. Correct: I did NOT have those comments in the file before I uploaded it. I experimented with adding comments afterwards.
I see nothing on the screen which tells me whether I am in Worksheet or Document mode. I just open with the default, which I believe is Worksheet mode. Also, I have just used the default math mode, which is 2-D. This is how things were set up when I first opened Maple when I first bought it. These are the modes I've stuck to ever since. I've tried playing with the dropdown menu with all the different types of math modes: 2-D, Warning, 2-D Output, Text Output, Error, Diagnostic. I have no idea what those things mean. However, I HAVE noticed that my file always tends to "jump" back into the default 2-D Math mode. Correct: I did NOT have those comments in the file before I uploaded it. I experimented with adding comments afterwards.
What needless complications by Maple! I OUGHT to be able to put as many comment lines into my Worksheet in Math Mode as I want. I just checked. If I have # comment Block of Maple math code it executes properly. But if I have # comment 1 # comment 2 Block of Maple math code I get the delimiting error message.
What needless complications by Maple! I OUGHT to be able to put as many comment lines into my Worksheet in Math Mode as I want. I just checked. If I have # comment Block of Maple math code it executes properly. But if I have # comment 1 # comment 2 Block of Maple math code I get the delimiting error message.
Thanks! printlevel:=2: worked printlevel=2: failed. Just yielded 1=2 as output. (1 being the default value for printlevel, as you said.)
Thanks! printlevel:=2: worked printlevel=2: failed. Just yielded 1=2 as output. (1 being the default value for printlevel, as you said.)
I did not catch the extra ) I needed. The following routine L := [4, 5]: for n to 2 do if (isprime(L[n])) then 7; else 9; end if; end do; executes with no error messages. But it outputs nothing. My output should be 9 # because L[1] = 4 is not prime 7 # because L[2] = 5 is prime Also, I notice that when I cut and paste my program from Maple into this textbox, the line breaks disappear - I had to put them back in above manually - and the parentheses around isprime(L[n]) disappear. I had to put those back in manually just now, too. Why?
I did not catch the extra ) I needed. The following routine L := [4, 5]: for n to 2 do if (isprime(L[n])) then 7; else 9; end if; end do; executes with no error messages. But it outputs nothing. My output should be 9 # because L[1] = 4 is not prime 7 # because L[2] = 5 is prime Also, I notice that when I cut and paste my program from Maple into this textbox, the line breaks disappear - I had to put them back in above manually - and the parentheses around isprime(L[n]) disappear. I had to put those back in manually just now, too. Why?
I kept searching "line break" in the Help menu, but all I got back was No Matches found. I knew a search for keyword "break" would yield references only to the flow-control statement "break", not a "line break". Also, under Basic Features > Mathematics > 2-D Math > Hints and Shortcut Keys I do not see reference to a soft line break or the Shift Enter keystroke you mentioned. I tried it and it works. But, everything that works, I need to see referenced in the Help Menu. Again, thank you to all who responded!
I should have typed, if I didn't, det(M) = a*b or det(M)= r*s using only small letters, {a,b,r,s}, to denote elements in the ring, R and only capital letters, A, B, etc. to denote matrices. Hope I didn't waste anyone's time!
Thank you for both your non-Maple and your Maple proof. Your Maple proof taught me how to use some new commands. I hate to ask: when you show Adj(A)x = 0, meaning, [[d -b][-c a]]*[[x 0][0 x]]=[[0 0][0 0]] you are saying ax=0, bx=0, cx=0, dx=0. So, R has a lot of zero-divisors, and nilpotent x^2=0. But, how does this make the entries, {a,b,c,d}, of A be x-multiples of elements in the ring, R? I need this theorem to be true in order for me to factor a certain huge matrix, M, filled with lots of indeterminantes. I didn't think of this conjecture as just a fun exercise. In my ring, R, there are no zero-divisors and no nilpotents. To answer one of the other responders' questions (I thank them for responding): the size of M is pre-determined. In my smallest application, M is a 12 by 12 matrix. Specifically, in my smallest example, e1, e2, e3 are indeterminate functions of x, differentially independent over Q(x). R=Z[e1,e2,e3,De1, De2, De3, D^2e1, D^2e2, D^2e3, D^3e1, D^3e2, D^3e3] Also, HOW do I make a line break in Maple without setting off execution? I need to be able to write my flow control statements on multiple lines, such as if (isprime(n)) then n+1 else n+2
I did mean also to add: my ring R has an identity. Let char(R)=0, too. Feel free to do the char(R)=p>0 case for me, too :). Correct me if I did not set up my conjecture properly, but, your example: M factors as M = A*B where A =[[x,0],[0,1]] and B =[[1,0],[0,x^2]] det M = x^3 det A = x det B = x^2 so det M factors over R into two non-units, and M factors over GL2(R) into two matrices with these factors as determinants. So, at the moment, I still don't see a counterexample. Oh, also, the matrices must be size N by N where N > 1. The result is trivially true for N=1. I started a sketch of a proof in the N=2 case, but I realized it was wrong as I began to fill in the details.
1 2 3 4 5 Page 3 of 5