Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2009

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

Search the Archive

Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg96283] Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm
  • From: "slawek" <human at site.pl>
  • Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 05:16:44 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <200902031132.GAA00303@smc.vnet.net> <7461949.1234000227010.JavaMail.root@m02> <gmp121$c7f$1@smc.vnet.net>

U¿ytkownik "David Park" <djmpark at comcast.net> napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci 
news:gmp121$c7f$1 at smc.vnet.net...
> Mathematical symbols are always arbitrary and the only important thing is
> that a book or application make explicit the meaning of the symbols used.
> And Mathematica does make clear how Log is used. Presumably, the reader or
> user will know what he wants.


Any language is arbitrary, but a little experiment should make things 
simpler. Just read my message:

%=&@ #82 873xxi uu ds auis sdu32 33409 fj

You understand this, do not you? I just use "arbitrary symbols"! So what... 
it is unreadable? :)

slawek



  • Prev by Date: Re: Mathematicas simplifications
  • Next by Date: Re: Usage of #1
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm
  • Next by thread: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm