Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2004
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2004

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

Search the Archive

Re: sorry, but more q's on random numbers

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg50516] Re: sorry, but more q's on random numbers
  • From: Jens-Peer Kuska <kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
  • Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 05:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
  • Organization: Universitaet Leipzig
  • References: <chmomi$a2a$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hi,

learn to type

?Random

and hit Ctrl-Enter. And what comes out:

"Random[ ] gives a uniformly distributed pseudorandom Real in the range
0 to \
1. Random[type, range] gives a pseudorandom number of the specified
type, \
lying in the specified range. Possible types are: Integer, Real and
Complex. \
The default range is 0 to 1. You can give the range {min, max}
explicitly; a \
range specification of max is equivalent to {0, max}"

may be the the random numbers are uniform distributed and 
just scaled into the desired range ???

Regards
  Jens


sean kim wrote:
> 
> Hello Group,
> 
> I hate to keep revisiting this, but if i may...
> 
> What kind of distribution do I get if I take the base
> 10 Log of Random[Real, {range}]?
> 
> is that Log Uniform? or normal?
> 
> Sorry for such newbie question.
> 
> also What's the best way to show what type of
> distribution it is?  I was thinking of listplot.
> 
> thanks in advance for any insights.
> 
> sean
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


  • Prev by Date: Re: problem with ExpectedValue[xx-x, PoissonDistribution[m],x]
  • Next by Date: Re: How to solve a simple Trig cofunction?
  • Previous by thread: sorry, but more q's on random numbers
  • Next by thread: Re: sorry, but more q's on random numbers