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

You are not logged in. #326 20120715 12:33:10
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 20120715 13:00:15
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 20120715 14:33:04
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 20120715 21:41:13
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 20120715 21:46:10#331 20120718 23:14:41
Re: PSLQ and LLL?Thought so. 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 20120719 02:20:14
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 20130331 02:36:53
Re: PSLQ and LLL?Hi bobbym 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 20130331 03:40:07
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 20130331 09:30:53
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 20130331 10:13:35
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 20130331 10:27:50
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 20130331 10:28:23
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 20130331 10:30:20
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 20130331 10:32:42
Re: PSLQ and LLL?Because you answer with short replies. Now what the heck does, "I have" tell me. Post the "I have." 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 20130331 10:41:46
Re: PSLQ and LLL?I'm sorry. I am on a phone. 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 20130331 10:43:45
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 20130331 10:45:05
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 20130331 10:49:19
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 20130331 10:58:52
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 20130331 11:04:58
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 20130331 11:11:06
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 20130331 11:15:39
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 20130331 11:17:16
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 20130331 11:19:07
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. 