[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: Integration

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg44437] Re: Integration
• From: akhmel at hotmail.com (Alex)
• Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 06:01:25 -0500 (EST)
• References: <bmg0li$e9k$1@smc.vnet.net> <bmj2os$prs$1@smc.vnet.net> <200311040823.DAA10480@smc.vnet.net> <200311051500.KAA26314@smc.vnet.net> <200311071016.FAA05417@smc.vnet.net> <boif1p$o9u$1@smc.vnet.net>
• Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl> wrote in message news:<boif1p$o9u$1 at smc.vnet.net>...
> The former. This is what is meant by "in principle". There are lot's of 
> algorithms that work "in principle" but it is very easy to produce 
> fairly "simple looking" cases where no answer can be expected  during 
> the life-time of the user (or sometimes even mankind).
> 
> The fact that Mathematica does not arrive at an answer before the 
> user's patience is exhausted or his computer runs out of memory does 
> not mean, of course,  that Mathematica's implementation of an algorithm 
> is incomplete.
> 
> Andrzej Kozlowski

For God's sake, of course one could imagine an integral which would
take lifetime to compute. I am talking about mine which is rather
simple and I computed it manually. How can one justify Mathematica not
being able to handle it? Something is very bloody wrong with their
implementation of their algorithm.

Alex

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Integration
    • From: Daniel Lichtblau <danl@wolfram.com>
  • Re: Re: Integration
    • From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>

• References:
  • Re: Integration
    • From: akhmel@hotmail.com (Alex)
  • Re: Re: Integration
    • From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>
  • Re: Re: Re: Integration
    • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.edu>