Using Calc

Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

Dear Compeers,

Have looked at the manual for calc and the documentation is extremely
difficult to follow.

For instance, I need some examples on what to do for

1. Performing Simplifications
2. Polynomial Simplification
3. Matrix computations
3. Solution of Equations
3. Differentiation
4. Integration

Regards
Christopher

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Christopher Dimech wrote:

> For instance, I need some examples on what to do for [...]
> Matrix computations

How many dimensions?

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 6:04 PM
> From: "Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> > For instance, I need some examples on what to do for [...]
> > Matrix computations
>
> How many dimensions?

For non-square, can be anything.

> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Christopher Dimech wrote:

>>> For instance, I need some examples on what to do for [...]
>>> Matrix computations
>>
>> How many dimensions?
>
> For non-square, can be anything.

Are you aware that in the realm of science right at the border
between sanity and insensitivity the cognitive revolution is
and elegant juggler with Chinese boxes and Russian dolls -
while the envelope itself - a hypercube of almost exclusively
emotions...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvRi9lsGDIo&ucbcb=1

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 10:31 PM
> From: "Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> >>> For instance, I need some examples on what to do for [...]
> >>> Matrix computations
> >>
> >> How many dimensions?
> >
> > For non-square, can be anything.
>
> Are you aware that in the realm of science right at the border
> between sanity and insensitivity the cognitive revolution is
> and elegant juggler with Chinese boxes and Russian dolls -
> while the envelope itself - a hypercube of almost exclusively
> emotions...

That would be from too many drugs.  I get very unproductive!

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvRi9lsGDIo&ucbcb=1
>
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

But then the task is to do the computations with org babel.

E.g. Vector addition, dot product, cross product.

[1,2,3] [4,5,6] +


> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 6:04 PM
> From: "Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> > For instance, I need some examples on what to do for [...]
> > Matrix computations
>
> How many dimensions?
>
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:15, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> But then the task is to do the computations with org babel.
>
> E.g. Vector addition, dot product, cross product.
>
> [1,2,3] [4,5,6] +

Or use Embedded Calc and type C-x * u on a line that looks like this:

   [1,2,3] + [4,5,6] =>

with blank lines before and after.

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:21 PM
> From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:15, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > But then the task is to do the computations with org babel.
> >
> > E.g. Vector addition, dot product, cross product.
> >
> > [1,2,3] [4,5,6] +
>
> Or use Embedded Calc and type C-x * u on a line that looks like this:
>
>    [1,2,3] + [4,5,6] =>
>
> with blank lines before and after.

Great.  The following work

[1,2,3] + [4,5,6] =>

[1,2,3] * [4,5,6] =>

The following gets matrix multiplication

[ [1.,2.,3.] [4.,5.,6.] [7.,8.,9.] ] * [ [9.,8.,7.] [6.,5.,4.] [3., 2.,1.] ] =>

It is then very easy to end up with very long lines.  Is there a solution to this?


> --
> Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:31, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> The following gets matrix multiplication
>
> [ [1.,2.,3.] [4.,5.,6.] [7.,8.,9.] ] * [ [9.,8.,7.] [6.,5.,4.] [3., 2.,1.] ] =>
>
> It is then very easy to end up with very long lines.  Is there a
> solution to this?

I get:

[ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
  [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
  [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]

as a result so not long lines at all?  Of course, if your system gets
larger, there will be an issue but then I would suggest you use a
different language (octave for numerics, maxima for symbolic, both
usable via org babel src blocks if you wish).  I.e. use the right tool
for the job?

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:39 PM
> From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:31, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > The following gets matrix multiplication
> >
> > [ [1.,2.,3.] [4.,5.,6.] [7.,8.,9.] ] * [ [9.,8.,7.] [6.,5.,4.] [3., 2.,1.] ] =>
> >
> > It is then very easy to end up with very long lines.  Is there a
> > solution to this?
>
> I get:
>
> [ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
>   [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
>   [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]

I forgot that I was using "C-c C-c".

When I used "C-c * u", the original expression got deleted.

Could there be a fix for that?

> as a result so not long lines at all?  Of course, if your system gets
> larger, there will be an issue but then I would suggest you use a
> different language (octave for numerics, maxima for symbolic, both
> usable via org babel src blocks if you wish).  I.e. use the right tool
> for the job?
>
> --
> Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:48, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> When I used "C-c * u", the original expression got deleted.

C-x * u?

> Could there be a fix for that?

Yes, possibly: you should read the Calc info manual and in particular
the section on Embedded Calc which is quite thorough.

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

Any idea how I can compute the derivative of sinc(2 x) in org-babel?

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:58 PM
> From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:48, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > When I used "C-c * u", the original expression got deleted.
>
> C-x * u?
>
> > Could there be a fix for that?
>
> Yes, possibly: you should read the Calc info manual and in particular
> the section on Embedded Calc which is quite thorough.
>
> --
> Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

Derivative can be done with

deriv(sin(x), x) =>

But then I have to transform to radians.  How can I write that?

> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2021 at 12:42 AM
> From: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> To: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> Any idea how I can compute the derivative of sinc(2 x) in org-babel?
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:58 PM
> > From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> > To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: Using Calc
> >
> > On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:48, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > > When I used "C-c * u", the original expression got deleted.
> >
> > C-x * u?
> >
> > > Could there be a fix for that?
> >
> > Yes, possibly: you should read the Calc info manual and in particular
> > the section on Embedded Calc which is quite thorough.
> >
> > --
> > Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

I have made some more progress with calc.

A pending thing is how to use taylor because

taylor(ln(x), x, 3) =>

did not do anything.  I might be missing something or the example is not a good one.

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:58 PM
> From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:48, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > When I used "C-c * u", the original expression got deleted.
>
> C-x * u?
>
> > Could there be a fix for that?
>
> Yes, possibly: you should read the Calc info manual and in particular
> the section on Embedded Calc which is quite thorough.
>
> --
> Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Nick Dokos]

Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> writes:

> I have made some more progress with calc.
>
> A pending thing is how to use taylor because
>
> taylor(ln(x), x, 3) =>
>
> did not do anything.  I might be missing something or the example is not a good one.
>

There is no Taylor expansion of the logarithm around x=0: it diverges there.

Try

  taylor(ln(x), x-1, 3) =>

to get the usual expansion around x=1.

-- 
Nick

"There are only two hard problems in computer science: cache
invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors." -Martin Fowler

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Nick Dokos wrote:

> There is no Taylor expansion of the logarithm around x=0: it
> diverges there.
>
> Try
>
>   taylor(ln(x), x-1, 3) =>
>
> to get the usual expansion around x=1.

Wow, math, ain't it cool stuff?

But computers are more difficult, there you have to not only
think right, you must get it to work as well...

Also computers tend to attract different people, actually all
kinds of people!

There are nowadays tons of girls in science. In technology not
as many but they are there, everywhere. In math, always
a couple of very intelligent and dedicated girls, they are
a minority of course but they are there. CS tho - no girls!
There are girls in the business oriented computer educations,
that do bureaucracy/administration support systems for
business, public services and so on. However these girls
aren't really into code most of them, and certainly not code
for the sake of it, rather they like to be bosses of cool tech
projects, they are attracted to the lifestyle and "modern"
aspects of it.

No idea why all of this is what it is...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[tomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 348 bytes --]

On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 11:53:51PM +0200, Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor wrote:

> [...] CS tho - no girls!

Nah. We just don't see them [1]. Happens often.

(And this just off the top of my head. I happened to make
acquaintance with one of her students).

Cheers

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiane_Floyd
 - t

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 at 11:39 PM
> From: "Eric S Fraga" <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 13:31, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > The following gets matrix multiplication
> >
> > [ [1.,2.,3.] [4.,5.,6.] [7.,8.,9.] ] * [ [9.,8.,7.] [6.,5.,4.] [3., 2.,1.] ] =>
> >
> > It is then very easy to end up with very long lines.  Is there a
> > solution to this?
>
> I get:
>
> [ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
>   [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
>   [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]

--------

Doing the following, removes the *

[1, 2, 3] * [4, 2, 6] =>

--------

But the next keeps the +

[1, 2, 3] + [4, 7, 6] =>

It would be better if things remain consistent and we keep the *

--------

And with these two, one can change the values, re-evaluates
and get the correct values

[1, 2, 3] + [4, 133, 6] => [5, 135, 9]

[1, 2, 3] [4, 123, 6] => 268

--------

But with the following,

[ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
  [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
  [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]

If you try to change a value, everything gets messed up

[ [ 1., 123., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
  [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
  [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]



> as a result so not long lines at all?  Of course, if your system gets
> larger, there will be an issue but then I would suggest you use a
> different language (octave for numerics, maxima for symbolic, both
> usable via org babel src blocks if you wish).  I.e. use the right tool
> for the job?
>
> --
> Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Eric S Fraga wrote:

> I get:
>
> [ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
>   [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
>   [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]

!!!?

I did Linear Algebra in a period of pitch-black self-sacrifice
way back in 2009-06-10, hm, 11y 10m 25d 0h 0min 0s (4347 days)
ago, and it was so miserable doing that stuff I wrote a pretty
big program in SML to do all the common matrix operations,
including adding multiples of a row and stuff like that.

Now you tell me Emacs could do it all along?

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2021 at 2:58 AM
> From: "Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Using Calc
>
> Eric S Fraga wrote:
>
> > I get:
> >
> > [ [ 1., 2., 3. ]     [ [ 9., 8., 7. ]      [ [ 30.,  24.,  18. ]
> >   [ 4., 5., 6. ]   *   [ 6., 5., 4. ]   =>   [ 84.,  69.,  54. ]
> >   [ 7., 8., 9. ] ]     [ 3., 2., 1. ] ]      [ 138., 114., 90. ] ]
>
> !!!?
>
> I did Linear Algebra in a period of pitch-black self-sacrifice
> way back in 2009-06-10, hm, 11y 10m 25d 0h 0min 0s (4347 days)
> ago, and it was so miserable doing that stuff I wrote a pretty
> big program in SML to do all the common matrix operations,
> including adding multiples of a row and stuff like that.
>
> Now you tell me Emacs could do it all along?

Now any alien can do it!

> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>
>
>

Re: Using Calc

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday,  5 May 2021 at 16:58, Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor wrote:
> Now you tell me Emacs could do it all along?

:-)

Emacs can do *everything*.  You should no longer be surprised!

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4.5 on Debian bullseye/sid

Re: Using Calc

[Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

> Emacs can do *everything*.  You should no longer be surprised!

Sadly, my latest attempts at `M-x walk-the-dog` were unsuccessful.
I'm not sure why, but it gave me the impression that there's some kind
of fundamental limit I was bumping against.


        Stefan

Re: Using Calc

[Gregory Heytings]

>> Emacs can do *everything*.  You should no longer be surprised!
>
> Sadly, my latest attempts at `M-x walk-the-dog` were unsuccessful.  I'm 
> not sure why, but it gave me the impression that there's some kind of 
> fundamental limit I was bumping against.
>

Emacs has no limit.  If this is a feature you'd like to see in a future 
Emacs version, please M-x report-emacs-bug.

(On a side note, I'm currently working on a 'M-x make-kids-sleep' command 
in which you might be interested, too.  Stay tuned!)

Re: Using Calc

[Tassilo Horn]

Gregory Heytings <gregory@heytings.org> writes:

> (On a side note, I'm currently working on a 'M-x make-kids-sleep'
> command in which you might be interested, too.  Stay tuned!)

I have quite good success with reading them the Elisp manual in the
evening instead of stirring tales.

HTH,
Tassilo

Re: Using Calc

[Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Tassilo Horn [2021-05-05 20:52:24] wrote:
> Gregory Heytings <gregory@heytings.org> writes:
>> (On a side note, I'm currently working on a 'M-x make-kids-sleep'
>> command in which you might be interested, too.  Stay tuned!)
> I have quite good success with reading them the Elisp manual in the
> evening instead of stirring tales.

And if it doesn't work, the disassembly of `subr.el` is a pretty
good alternative.


        Stefan

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor wrote:

>> I have quite good success with reading them the Elisp
>> manual in the evening instead of stirring tales.
>
> And if it doesn't work, the disassembly of `subr.el` is
> a pretty good alternative.

Stefan, why don't you write Lisp for a drone?

They have already been used in wars.

But what positive implications and impacts might they still
have for humanity?

And with Lisp - the AI language!

Just endless potential.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[Gregory Heytings]

>>> (On a side note, I'm currently working on a 'M-x make-kids-sleep' 
>>> command in which you might be interested, too.  Stay tuned!)
>>
>> I have quite good success with reading them the Elisp manual in the 
>> evening instead of stirring tales.
>
> And if it doesn't work, the disassembly of `subr.el` is a pretty good 
> alternative.
>

IME, reading the ~700 key bindings of Gnus aloud with their command name 
is very effective, too.

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor wrote:

>> Emacs can do *everything*. You should no longer
>> be surprised!
>
> Sadly, my latest attempts at `M-x walk-the-dog` were
> unsuccessful. I'm not sure why, but it gave me the
> impression that there's some kind of fundamental limit I was
> bumping against.

Not a limit, but the last, and most difficult obstacle to
overcome before the summit.

Programming for the physical world.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Using Calc

[Bob Newell]

Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor
<help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> writes:

>> Emacs can do *everything*.  You should no longer be surprised!
>
> Sadly, my latest attempts at `M-x walk-the-dog` were unsuccessful.

I don't think that's due to be released until Emacs 30.1. I am
still searching the internet for M-x wash-the-dishes.

-- 
Bob Newell
Honolulu, Hawai`i

- Via GNU/Linux/Emacs/Gnus/BBDB

Re: Using Calc

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Eric S Fraga wrote:

> [1, 2, 3] + [4, 5, 6] => [5, 7, 9]

Say what? Man, cool.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal