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

You are not logged in.

## #326 2012-07-15 12:33:10

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Okay, I do not remember what the result was about the Lattice Reduce.

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.

## #327 2012-07-15 13:00:15

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

What do 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

## #328 2012-07-15 14:33:04

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Whether we found one or not.

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.

## #329 2012-07-15 21:41:13

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

We didn't. Do you think we could construct one?

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

## #330 2012-07-15 21:46:10

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

I tend to doubt 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.

## #331 2012-07-18 23:14:41

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Thought so.

I looked at the Wiki PSLQ and Lattice reduce articlea and there was a list of packages that have a built-in Lattice Reduce function, but there was no Maxima there. Luckily enough, I will soon be in possession of Maple, so there is still chance for a working PSLQ on my side.

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

## #332 2012-07-19 02:20:14

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Maple? When will you have it and why not Mathematica instead? They are about equally good but you will get more help with Mathematica.

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.

## #333 2013-03-31 02:36:53

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Hi bobbym

I have gotten PSLQ to work in M!

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

## #334 2013-03-31 03:40:07

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

How did you get it working? You know what the ole emmer says...

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.

## #335 2013-03-31 09:30:53

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Well, I just copied your code into it.

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

## #336 2013-03-31 10:13:35

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Did you try it out to see if it works?

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.

## #337 2013-03-31 10:27:50

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

I have.

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

## #338 2013-03-31 10:28:23

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Hahahhahahahah oh that is a good one!

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.

## #339 2013-03-31 10:30:20

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Why?

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

## #340 2013-03-31 10:32:42

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Because you answer with short replies. Now what the heck does, "I have" tell me. Post the "I have."

Where did he go?

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.

## #341 2013-03-31 10:41:46

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

I'm sorry. I am on a phone.

Anyway, yes, I have tried it, and it is working.

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

## #342 2013-03-31 10:43:45

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

I know what I would have tried it on...

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.

## #343 2013-03-31 10:45:05

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

A Diophantine?

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

## #344 2013-03-31 10:49:19

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Nope, that integral that we used contour integration on.

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.

## #345 2013-03-31 10:58:52

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Don't we have an exact answer 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

## #346 2013-03-31 11:04:58

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

Yes we do but do we have that answer from another completely different 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.

## #347 2013-03-31 11:11:06

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

I don't think we do. Maybe we could get an answer from another method.

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

## #348 2013-03-31 11:15:39

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

That is what the PSLQ can do!

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.

## #349 2013-03-31 11:17:16

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

But we have only one answer and it is an exact one. What do you plan on doing?

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

## #350 2013-03-31 11:19:07

bobbym

Online

### Re: PSLQ and LLL?

The PSLQ can also get that answer.

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.