Re: Re: Re: Re: Forcing a Derivative
I agree that Mathematica's notion of function MAY be broader than in
Mathematics in some respects (but in others is MUCH narrower -- that's
quite another topic). But I don't quite see how that necessarily
precludes a reasonable implementation of such an algebra of
numerically-valued functions of numerical arguments.
After all, I would not try to evaluate
either! But that doesn't prohibit me from evaluating, say, Sin'[x].
Likewise, just because I would not dream of asking for the syntactically
Plot + NumberForm
to have meaning does not preclude a meaning for, say, Sin + Exp.
Andrzej Kozlowski wrote:
> But one does not need to introduce x in f:
> 6 #1&
> No x was needed.
> As has been pointed out already a number of times, what is not
> implemented by default is the algebra of complex functions, that is,
> if f and g are functions then 2f + 3 g or 5 f*g are not considered by
> Mathematica to be functions. One reason for that maybe that in
> Mathematica the notion of a "function" is broader than in Mathematics.
> In any case the algebras of functions and operators are easy to
> implement oneself and this has already been done more than once on this
Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305
Prev by Date:
Re: Re: How to simplify to a result that is real
Next by Date:
Timing of statements inside a cell
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: Re: Forcing a Derivative
Next by thread:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Forcing a Derivative