Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #76 20120430 14:55:33
Re: Generating FunctionsYes, that is all there is to solving those types of permutation problems. Easy with generating functions hard with the school method. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #77 20120430 14:58:00
Re: Generating FunctionsSeems so. Sorry for asking this,but,how do we prove that the answer we get is what we wanted? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #78 20120430 15:03:34
Re: Generating FunctionsRemember the guy who did not want to do anymore math so he learned computers. That is how. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #79 20120430 22:36:56
Re: Generating FunctionsYou mean you? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #80 20120430 22:38:30
Re: Generating FunctionsThat does not make sense. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #81 20120430 22:39:47
Re: Generating FunctionsIf I am going to use this method in class,I need to be able to show it works by hand methods.It really doesn't make sense,but it s how it is. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #82 20120430 22:40:52
Re: Generating FunctionsNope, the computer backs up the hand method. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #83 20120430 22:41:48
Re: Generating FunctionsEither wayIs there a hand proof that using GFs like that does the job right? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #84 20120430 22:44:27
Re: Generating FunctionsDifferent question, they are both hand methods. That is why I do not remember them. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #85 20120430 22:45:34
Re: Generating FunctionsI don't understand you. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #86 20120430 22:55:00
Re: Generating FunctionsTalking about gfs is different then post #77 In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #87 20120430 22:57:11
Re: Generating FunctionsNo,I meantHow do I prove that the answer we got with GFs is the the correct one by hand methods? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #88 20120430 22:58:48
Re: Generating FunctionsProve? That is a funny word. Generally when you do a piece of algebra you do not have to prove it. The work is the proof. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #89 20120430 23:07:55
Re: Generating FunctionsWell,I am not sure if my prof is gonna be happy if I don't show somehow that the number that I got using GFs is correct. Code:CombGF(list):=block([i,j,a,m,s], i=1, m=1, while i<=length(list) do [ a=get(list,i), j=1, s=0, while j<=a do s=s+x^j, m=m*s, i=i+1 ], return(m) ); It compiles,but doesn't run properly. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #90 20120430 23:13:02
Re: Generating FunctionsYou wrote it? What is the output supposed to look like? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #91 20120430 23:17:11
Re: Generating FunctionsYes,I wrote it. PS I changed the code line: s=s+x^j, to s=s+x^j/j!, Last edited by anonimnystefy (20120430 23:17:39) The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #92 20120430 23:26:36
Re: Generating FunctionsExpanded out? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #93 20120430 23:27:41
Re: Generating FunctionsDoesn't matter.I can expand it later if I it doesn't expand itself on output. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #94 20120430 23:29:33
Re: Generating FunctionsQuestion first: In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #95 20120430 23:31:27
Re: Generating FunctionsI don't know what you mean. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #96 20120430 23:34:43
Re: Generating FunctionsSame thing. I wish to have the gf of a single dice. How do you do it? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #97 20120430 23:37:58
Re: Generating FunctionsIt doesn't do the ordinary GF.It does the exp GF for the type of problem you've given me before. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #98 20120430 23:39:10
Re: Generating FunctionsWhat I am saying is would you write a loop like you have done to do that? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #99 20120430 23:42:19
Re: Generating FunctionsThe code in #89 would be for that. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #100 20120430 23:44:18
Re: Generating FunctionsWhy are you using a procedural form in a CAS? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. 