1,165 reputation
512
bio website quantum.at
location Vienna, Austria
age
visits member for 2 years, 2 months
seen 6 hours ago

PhD student in Theoretical Physics

Research interests include Quantum Optomechanics and Quantum Optics


Apr
15
comment How can I calculate the limit without using the L'Hopital's rule
Nice, I like this way much better :)
Apr
14
comment How can I calculate the limit without using the L'Hopital's rule
Ok, we will see what the OP says anyways.
Apr
14
comment How can I calculate the limit without using the L'Hopital's rule
I am guessing this is math homework and should be migrated, don't you think so?
Feb
12
comment Make Sinc'[0] return 0 instead of Indeterminate
I of course agree that you need to take the limit but the same reasoning could be applied to Sinc alone. So I agree with @Rojo above that the reason to have a Sinc function should be that you don't have to evaluate Limit[Sin[x]/x,x->0] every time. It would be nice if the same was true for Sinc'.
Feb
11
comment Double integral with variable in the limits
@AlexeiBoulbitch Can you elaborate on your comment a bit? I would be interested what you mean with quasi analtytical. Also, how do you know it's not dimensionless?
Feb
6
comment Integration of DiracDelta
I think it would be nice to replace the integration region in the first integral by R^3 though.
Feb
6
comment Integration of DiracDelta
Hmpf... you beat me to it ;) +1
Jan
7
comment Understanding Villegas-Gayley
@JacobAkkerboom Could you explain to us what you mean by downcode?
Jan
4
comment Estimating a distribution using binned data
You could try posting this at Cross Validated first to identify an appropriate method to tackle this problem...
Dec
31
comment Redefine ArcCot to be inverse of range [0, Pi]
It's well known that compilation does not use user defined rules for built in functions (at least for some of them, I'm not sure if it's true for all of them). On the other hand I don't think it's surprising that things like this happen when you redefine protected functions. An easy fix is to define your own...
Dec
28
comment Redefine ArcCot to be inverse of range [0, Pi]
Falling back to the original behaviour is most probably due to auto-compilation, which uses the built in functions. This can be circumvented by using an additional Evaluate or in the case of Plot by the option Evaluated->True.
Nov
11
comment Bug in RepeatedNull?
Just an observation: f[s : {_[___] ...}] works in the "special case", but does not do what you want in general...
Nov
11
comment Bug in RepeatedNull?
Oh, now I know what you are saying... sorry for that! Now I'm puzzled myself :)
Nov
11
comment Bug in RepeatedNull?
@rm-rf Can do, I thought we might want to keep the OP puzzling for a bit :)
Nov
11
comment Bug in RepeatedNull?
That's not a problem with the pattern. Try List @@@ Sequence[]
Oct
10
comment When should I use Apply (or Function) and when @@ (or &)?
Leonid, I just read the last paragraph from the link to your book you provided above and now I'm wondering: Is that the convention you use when you write packages, i.e., not using shorthand notation and explicitly specifying Heads -> False?
Oct
2
comment Fastest way to do vector / matrix multiplication with constant matrix
On my machine with Mathematica V9 this is indeed nearly one order of magnitude faster than the Table approach.
Sep
20
comment How to declare a function that uses local variables of a module outside this module?
@Rojo Ok, so you are saying that "deconstructing" the expression during pattern matching/replacing creates a copy just as applying the same procedure in the body would. That makes complete sense of course! Thanks
Sep
20
comment How to declare a function that uses local variables of a module outside this module?
@Rojo That's very interesting, I wasn't aware of that! Is there an simple explanation why it behaves like that?
Sep
20
comment How to declare a function that uses local variables of a module outside this module?
@Rojo Just to make sure I understand Mathematica's memory handling correctly: In the pass-by-value case, if the passed expression is not "changed" in the function (e.g. you only extract parts of the expression by Part[xx,1] and process that further), no copy is created, right? In other words, just the fact that you pass an expression by-value does not mean you use more memory...