Re: Find all roots with FindRoot

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg126285] Re: Find all roots with FindRoot
• From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akozlowski at gmail.com>
• Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:07:01 -0400 (EDT)
• Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
• References: <25227796.28036.1334923020612.JavaMail.root@m06> <201204260928.FAA05588@smc.vnet.net> <201204280927.FAA00717@smc.vnet.net> <CALe_+=rU23zCn2XiYYBwUi8WcSh6m-hr4bXVAaoxszM-fBztdQ@mail.gmail.com>

```
On 28 Apr 2012, at 13:02, Mikael Anderson wrote:

> Actually I was using NSolve and was happy with that (see below). Then
I happened to see the post on RootSerach and wanted to test it to see if
I get the same results as NSolve. I got surprised that by increasing the
range I did not get the same answer and hence posted the question.
>
> BTW Andrzej, do you see any advantage in using Reduce compared to
NSolve?
>

In Mathematica version 7 NSolve could only solve algebraic equations and
Reduce could also solve transcendental (analytic) ones as well as
inequalities. In version 8 NSolve can solve the same kind of equations
as Reduce (I think it actually calls on Reduce to solve non-algebraic
equations so you are actually using Reduce) and it even takes the
options WorkingPrecision->Infinity:

NSolve[x^2 - x + 1 == 0, x, WorkingPrecision -> Infinity]
{{x -> (-1)^(1/3)}, {x -> -(-1)^(2/3)}}

The differences, apart from the different form of output concerns
solving inequalities (NSolve can't do that) and equations with symbolic
parameters (NSolve can't do that but Solve can).

The reason why I used Reduced is that I still sometimes forget who much
Solve and NSolve were upgraded in Mathemaitca 8.

Andrzej Kozlowski

```

• Prev by Date: Re: Question about Integration and citation
• Next by Date: Creating 'smart' textbooks with mathematica?
• Previous by thread: Re: Find all roots with FindRoot
• Next by thread: Re: Find all roots with FindRoot