Any results an individual produces has to be independently reproduced before it will be accepted. I'm not a fan of Stephen Wolfram's Mathematica by Stephen Wolfram for a variety of reasons, but I feel like this is an overreaction.Ĭreating an analogy that is strained to the point of breaking ab initio, our brains are closed-source black boxes. Since it's closed source, and is therefore a black box, it should have no place in serious mathematics. Of course Mathematica will still have to do some sampling and looping under the hood, but at the top level it feels a lot more like mathematics with a dash of programming than programming to probe a mathematical result. This function can be differentiated and integrated, time-shifted, convolved, etc., all symbolically. Plot the input (samples) against the output (samples) and connect the dots.ĭefine a function (in the mathematical sense) that you want to plot. Inside of a for loop, calculate the output value for each of your input value and store these in another array.
Be careful how you sample if your inputs aren't dense enough, your plot might look "jaggy".
In python, plotting will probably go a lot likeĭefine a function (in the python sense) that you want to plotīuild an array of input values. For example, consider plotting a function. This makes it a lot closer to "moving symbols around a page" mathematics than those languages (which might be considered close "shut up and calculate" mathematics). Mathematica is, first and foremost, a symbolic language with term-rewrite capabilities.
0 kommentar(er)
