Or you could just use the real thing for free at https://www.open.wolframcloud.com/
Or even run it for free on a Raspberry Pi (or under a Pi emulation on a PC, albeit slowly).
Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
31–40 of 78 posts
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value of Mathematica is pretty straightforward. The language it provides is nothing special, but the scientific and mathematic routines, along with the symbolic support, put it in a class by itself- no open source package I've seen does root finding and other similar processes as effectively. The symbolic stuff is pretty cool too. Years ago I wrote "pyml" which made all the Mathematica features available in Pytho…
And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician. The value of maths is 1) it's "open-source", 2) it's free to use, 3) if you want to switch from one module to another (say, number theory to category theory) you are able to do so using the same tools (pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician), and so long as the two "modules" are inter-operable it flows…
you are describing a very limited view of what it means to do mathematics. and no, all of mathematics is not open source. much of it is locked behind institutional barriers.
also, i don't understand this fervent attitude that something must be free and open source to be useful. a lot of open source software is complete trash. there is a reason why people pay to use tools like matlab, labview, and mathematica. it is because their value exceeds their cost.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value of Mathematica is pretty straightforward. The language it provides is nothing special, but the scientific and mathematic routines, along with the symbolic support, put it in a class by itself- no open source package I've seen does root finding and other similar processes as effectively. The symbolic stuff is pretty cool too. Years ago I wrote "pyml" which made all the Mathematica features available in Pytho…
And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician. The value of maths is 1) it's "open-source", 2) it's free to use, 3) if you want to switch from one module to another (say, number theory to category theory) you are able to do so using the same tools (pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician), and so long as the two "modules" are inter-operable it flows…
I should have said:
"And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician."
I wasn't meaning to imply that Mathematica has no value or has little value. It's indeed awesome both productivity wise and for just enjoying the exercise of doing math.
I was trying, and doing a poor job, to give reasons why pencil and paper has value. Not to the exclusion of Mathematica or more so than Mathematica. Just, that it still has tons of value. And that, maybe that is what these open source projects are trying to recreate that Mathematica has not yet captured.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. But then my question is how big is the user base that WANTS to use Mathematica but cannot AFFORD it? Because for a first time user just hunting for a symbolic math, the buy in might not be there.
As the documentation says "Mathics will probably never have the power to compete with Mathematica® in industrial applications; yet, it might be an interesting alternative for educational purposes.". Moreover unlike Mathematica, anyone can examine the code, a definite plus for students.
that doesn't make too much sense because many, many universities already hold site licenses for mathematica where it is either free or very cheap.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician. The value of maths is 1) it's "open-source", 2) it's free to use, 3) if you want to switch from one module to another (say, number theory to category theory) you are able to do so using the same tools (pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician), and so long as the two "modules" are inter-operable it flows…
Or I can use Mathematica to get my derivative, plug it into my numerical optimization routine and not have to think about it again. That's a much better feeling to me.
Yes, I totally agree that Mathematica (other projects) can be the way to go when getting work done. No argument there.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#36If you're looking for a mature alternative, Maxima CAS ( http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ ) is worth looking into. It doesn't aim for syntax compatibility with Mathematica as this does, but it is quite usable and fast.
It's also available on Android.
I used Maxima during my engineering course and found it rather useful for checking my differentiation and integration algebra.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#37If you're looking for a mature alternative, Maxima CAS ( http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ ) is worth looking into. It doesn't aim for syntax compatibility with Mathematica as this does, but it is quite usable and fast.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value of Mathematica is pretty straightforward. The language it provides is nothing special, but the scientific and mathematic routines, along with the symbolic support, put it in a class by itself- no open source package I've seen does root finding and other similar processes as effectively. The symbolic stuff is pretty cool too. Years ago I wrote "pyml" which made all the Mathematica features available in Pytho…
And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician. The value of maths is 1) it's "open-source", 2) it's free to use, 3) if you want to switch from one module to another (say, number theory to category theory) you are able to do so using the same tools (pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician), and so long as the two "modules" are inter-operable it flows…
I like Mathematica and find it a sometimes, very useful tool. I've taken over two dozen University courses in mathematics, including topology, abstract algebra, analysis, combinatorics, number theory, etc. Yet, even simply equations can stump my rather meager ability to solve them and this is where Mathematica is so useful. You can use it interactively to quickly traverse the difficult ground on the way to insight or a solution about your problems.
Consider the simple looking problem, find the definite integral of sin(x^2) from 0 to positive infinity. This is a real expression that that occurs naturally in the study of electromagnetism.
Solving this is beyond the ability of most practicing mathematicians to just sit down and noodle out an answer. The integral in known as the Fresnel integral and has the pretty answer of sqrt(pi/2)/2. Mathematica gives me the answer in just a second.
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#39Genuine question - what is the use of all these versus something like R or Pandas that is actually usable in production as well. What is missing in R/Pandas that makes people choose other pieces of software that does something very similar? Commercial versions of software probably has an edge in support/performance/libraries...Or (as with Simulink ) provides a very specific piece of functionality or integration. But…
Pandas doesn't really do symbolic computation... at least for me that is 90% of the utility of Mathematica (Maple on the other hand....)
Yeah I completely agree, I've yet to use anything as good as Mathematica for symbolic algebra/computation. Not quite sure what you're comment about Maple means though, would you mind expanding?
Re: Mathics: A free, light-weight alternative to Mathematica
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value of Mathematica is pretty straightforward. The language it provides is nothing special, but the scientific and mathematic routines, along with the symbolic support, put it in a class by itself- no open source package I've seen does root finding and other similar processes as effectively. The symbolic stuff is pretty cool too. Years ago I wrote "pyml" which made all the Mathematica features available in Pytho…
And yet Mathematica is not nearly as effective as math when done by pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician. The value of maths is 1) it's "open-source", 2) it's free to use, 3) if you want to switch from one module to another (say, number theory to category theory) you are able to do so using the same tools (pencil, paper, and a trained mathematician), and so long as the two "modules" are inter-operable it flows…
I use mathematica to do engineering, not math. But there are definitely people who do recreational mathematics with computers, and some of them have shown things that can't be done with pencil and paper. The proof for the four color theorem is a nice example of this. Computers are useful tools for doing things we can't execute quickly by hand, or cleverly approximate/solve through more elegant methods.