[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: TraditionalForm Plot
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg129472] Re: TraditionalForm Plot
*From*: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
*Date*: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 01:41:23 -0500 (EST)
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
*Delivered-to*: mathgroup-newout@smc.vnet.net
*Delivered-to*: mathgroup-newsend@smc.vnet.net
*References*: <20130115043225.4A239697E@smc.vnet.net>
On Jan 14, 2013, at 11:32 PM, Berthold Hamburger <b-hamburger at artinso.com> wrote:
> I just discovered that plotting a function that is in TraditionalForm
> (via postfix //TraditionalForm) results in an empty plot. Is this
> correct, or is this a mistake?
I presume you meant something like the following...
f[x_] := Cos[x]
Plot[f[x] // TraditionalForm, {x, 0, 2 Pi}]
=85 which indeed results in no graph appearing.
But why do that?
If you wish, make the entire Plot cell TraditionalForm; that will work OK -- with a reference to separately defined function f (whether that f was defined in an Input cell that had TraditionalForm or StandardForm) or with the function expression directly embedded as the first argument.
Or, if you wish, make just the definition of your function in TraditionalForm. Then use a StandardForm Plot expression.
---
Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts 413 55-2838 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305
Prev by Date:
**Re: Mathematica and Lisp**
Next by Date:
**Re: neighborhood operations on image**
Previous by thread:
**TraditionalForm Plot**
Next by thread:
**Re: TraditionalForm Plot**
| |