MathGroup Archive 2003

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

Search the Archive

RE: Condition/ constaint problem

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg41060] RE: Condition/ constaint problem
  • From: "Ersek, Ted R" <ErsekTR at navair.navy.mil>
  • Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 04:24:29 -0400 (EDT)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

> 	In David Withoff's earlier message that I refer to below, he
> suggested that maybe future 
> 	versions of Mathematica shouldn't do numerical derivatives because
> it can't always do it reliably.  
> 	I think it would be good to allow for that as an option.  Something
> like 
> 	      SetOptions[Derivative, Method->None]
> 	would ensure Derivatives are not approximated.  While
> 	      SetOptions[Derivative, Method->EulerSum]
> 	would work like the default implementation of
> NumericalMath`NLimit'ND.
> 
> 	-----------------------------
> 
> 	At
> http://forums.wolfram.com/mathgroup/archive/2003/Apr/msg00688.html
> 	David Withoff explained how NumericalMath`NLimit`ND can be used to
> correct for a problem with approximating a derivative via  the built-in
> Derivative function.  David said the built in Derivative function does the
> same thing as NumericalMath`NLimit`ND but without knowing the scale of
> variation of the function.  Perhaps the built in Derivative function
> should have the same options as NumericalMath`NLimit`ND which are
> (WorkingPrecision, Scale, Terms, Method).  Of course the setting of these
> options would only be relavent when numerical differentiation is needed.
> Also these options could have default settings that would cause the
> calculation to work as it does now (ie. Scale->Automatic).
> 
> 	Regards,
> 	  Ted Ersek
> 
> 


  • Prev by Date: Re: Solving DEs by NDSolve
  • Next by Date: RE: Writing Applications for Mac OS X
  • Previous by thread: Re: Condition/ constaint problem
  • Next by thread: Solving DEs by NDSolve