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>