MathGroup Archive 2009

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

Search the Archive

Re: TraditionForm Appears to be Inconsistent

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg99678] Re: TraditionForm Appears to be Inconsistent
  • From: Szabolcs <szhorvat at>
  • Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 06:22:43 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <9293149.1241693402776.JavaMail.root@n11> <gu0bal$fsj$>

On May 9, 10:19 am, AES <sieg... at> wrote:
> In article <gu0bal$fs... at>,
>  "David Park" <djmp... at> wrote:
> > One just has to get used to what simplifications Mathematica automatica=
> > does and which ones it doesn't do. Some of the automatic ones are annoy=
> > such as 1/Sin[x] -> Csc[x].
> This particular one has always been particularly puzzling for me.  In m=
> experience at least, more or less everyone uses Sin and Cos in writing
> out any expressions containing these functions, and practically no one
> ever uses Sec and Csc.  
> Moreover, I'd make a small bet that if you took a large random sample of
> science and engineering professionals, approaching half of them would
> get the relationships between Sin and Cos, and Sec and Csc, wrong.  
> ("Let's see -- it's COsine and COsecant, and then Sin and Secant --
> right?")
> Is there some fundamental mathematical or logical reason behind
> Mathematica's choice?  Or some strongly embedded or historical
> convention in the field of symbolic algebra that leads to this being
> done?

prettify[expr_] := Module[{sin, cos, result},
  result = expr /. {Csc[e_] -> 1/sin[e], Sec[e_] -> 1/cos[e]};
  HoldForm[Evaluate[result]] /. {sin -> Sin, cos -> Cos}

  • Prev by Date: Re: second simple problem
  • Next by Date: Re: Re: Making a user interface
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: TraditionForm Appears to be Inconsistent
  • Next by thread: Message passing in mathematica?