Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset
From: paul (paul_tan_at_aoI.com)
Date: 08/19/04
- Next message: Bill Rowe: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab"
- Previous message: Richard Fateman: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- In reply to: Richard Fateman: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- Next in thread: Dr. Agzamov: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:36:02 GMT
Your paragraphs are numbered in text below:
1. Initially you deemed ANY comparison of Matlab vs. Mathematica invalid,
now you are finally participating in the discussion, whereas before you were
completely calling ANY comparison baseless and ridiculous.
2. Do you think a BigMac is a subset of a Camry??? Do you really believe
comparing Mathematica vs. Matlab is like comparing BigMac to Camry???
3. Are you trying to imply that only Mathematica has flaws and Matlab is
flawless?? No one claimed Mathematica was flawless.
4. This is baseless. Does that have anything to do with competition and
cost factors??
5. So again, now you believe all of a sudden that this is a "valid"
comparison??? You were against such comparison just a few days ago. Nothing
has changed about these two software in the past week!
6. Baseless and a fundamentally flawed argument completely! This is not
about lists, and it shows how little you understand about Mathematica's
construct! Do you realize that by continuing this argument publicly, you
are only revealing the extent of your unfamiliarity with Mathematica and how
terrible it looks for a "scientist" of your "caliber" to be seen to argue
"against" or "for" something without having studied it in detail first???
The fundamental difference between Mathematica and Matlab is in the
implementation of a holistic and rigorous methodology which is meant to
address Mathematics much as humans address mathematics! That is what I call
a natural language.
7. Not making anything up, do your research, before you throw out baseless
accusations professor!
8. There you go again, what does this have to do with English? So, just
because YOUR natural language maybe English, does it make it so that ALL of
us have to speak English for it to count? What's your point? A natural
language in this sense refers to a language that flows "naturally" not
something that limits and forces additional constraints upon your conversion
of an expression of a scientific/engineering problem into one of
mathematical form. Mathematica is more "naturally" capable of doing that
than Matlab, no doubt about it!
9. No, but I'm not in a similar position as you. First, I have not been
sending insulting and belligerent emails to any newsgroups, and Second, I am
not in a public position as you are! If I say something, nobody cares, but
if you say something specially using your University's email, then all eyes
are on you, you don't want to portray yourself as someone who is
unreasonable and continues to pursue these unimportant and insignificant
emails, it just might make people think that you don't have any better usage
of your time than to sit and respond to email chains, while you should be
using public's tax funds for real research, that's supposed to benefit
society!!!!!
10. I believe Deans do care about this, specially if their faculty are not
using their time and funds wisely and towards the advancement of research,
which is what they are supposed to be paid to do!
11. Did you ever think that maybe AZ stopped responding, because of your
over imposing and unfriendly attitude? And that possibly someone like me
(who is usually just an observer in these forums), simply didn't feel like
standing idle while you pounded people??? You are seriously out of line with
your unreasonable stance on such a simple question! If you don't agree with
it, that's FINE: it's a free world, you can disagree! But don't impose your
thoughts on the rest of us!!!! Just make your point and then be quite and
let others give input. Don't continue to force your idea by repeating
yourself over and over and over and .................
12. Good idea! Let's get back to symbolic mathematics! Only if you
stopped to think for a minute, you will realize that YOU were the one who
dragged this whole thing OUT of a technical and mathematical discussion and
INTO a personal and non-technical issue in the VERY beginning! Perhaps, if
you had simply given your input and then stayed out of it, this chain
wouldn't have taken so long and digressed so terribly out of topic!
Perhaps, next time, you will give some thought to your approach on
addressing these matters in a public forum such as this, specially in the
way you handle people's questions. Please don't be belligerent! Try to be
nice, that's a COMMON Courtesy to ALL! Do you get it??? You are not a KING,
or a God! You are a person, just like the rest of us! You are not a
genius, and even if you were, that does NOT entitle you to any special
treatment, or accommodations!! You should respect people, and treat them as
YOU wish to be treated and respected! Don't ASSUME anything about ANYONE in
here! We are all intelligent and sophisticated people in our own eyes and
we all deserve to be respected and tolerated in a peaceful and respectful
manner! YOU included! Please extend the courtesy of politeness to all
members, regardless of their standing, and try to "promote" a technical
discussion, not pound the person down, or by patronizing the person or
demoralizing the person! These are all important to adhere to in any forum.
This is public debate 101! Perhaps you should enroll in that course!
With all do respect,
"Richard Fateman" <rfateman@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:4124173D.3050109@sbcglobal.net...
>
>
> paul wrote:
>
> > Mr. Fateman,
> >
> > hmmm, reading the previous emails in this email chain, you were an
ardent
> > opponent of any comparison of any kind between Mathematica and Matlab,
you
> > were even rude to one of the folks in here, what happened Prof.? Now,
here
> > you are making very nice comparisons and pointing out the differences in
the
> > two software!
>
1===========> Hm, I was commenting on a very specific point, which was the
assertion
> by you, that a 2-year old comparison (however ill-founded that might
> have been then!), must be discarded because Mathematica 5.0 is vastly
> better than Mathematica 4.0. And your further assertion that
> Mathematica is "much superior" in the absence of a context for the
> comparison.
>
> What are we to make of your analysis, given you erratic
> > approach to this problem, first you claim it is absolutely lunatic to
> > suggest any kind of similarity between these two software and even
compared
> > it to comparing McDonald Burger to Toyota Camry,
2========> Um, a Big Mac is not a subset of a Toyota Camry?
>
> and now couple of days
> > later, you are doing exactly that comparison!! What is really behind
your
> > feverish hatred of Mathematica?
>
3==========> I don't hate Mathematica. Why would I write a parser for the
Mathematica
> language, and give it away? I think Mathematica is badly flawed in a
> number of ways. Some of the flaws have been fixed, (e.g. some components
> of interval arithmetic), but many are part of Wolfram's intentional
> design, I think.
>
> Does it bother you to face the fact that
> > Mathematica is really much superior to Matlab?
>
4==========> I think it is much more interesting to compare Mathematica to
programs
> that are intended to do SYMBOLIC computing, like Macsyma/Maxima, Maple,
> Reduce, Axiom, Mupad, Pari, etc etc.
>
5==========> Your assertion that the Mathematica "philosophy" makes it
superior to
> Matlab is unsupported by any metric you provide.
>
> Or to face the fact that
> > Matlab is based on an old methodology of mathematical analysis, namely:
> > MATRIX manipulation???
>
6========> Whoa. Do you know how Lists are represented in Mathematica?
Could it be
> they are represented as 1-dimensional matrices?
> Do you know that you can represent, --as is done in Matlab-- polynomials
> as .. matrices?
> Do you know that engineers generally represent many problems (e.g.
> solving partial differential equations numerically) through the old
> methodology of ... matrices?
> And advanced techniques like sparse matrix representations are not, so
> far as I know, something that can be easily done in Mathematica?
>
> Face it, Matlab tackles engineering problems in a
> > very non-intuitive manner, you MUST convert ALL problems into some sort
of
> > Numerical Column-ated matrix format to be addressed in Matlab, which
makes
> > it extremely un-natural to use for describing real world physics and
> > specially engineering problems.
>
7=====> Speaking off the top of your head, I imagine. Are you making this up
or
> can you, for example, cite some published work? I like to think about
> how to represent problems, and computations, and have even published
> papers about such topics. But matrices still pop up.
>
> And Matlab does not lend itself to natural
> > language programming!
>
8=======> "natural language" programming means "In English" if that is your
> natural language. If you mean "natural" as appropriate for an
> application, then Matlab is kind of popular. Because matrices are kind
> of popular. If you mean "natural" as C/C++/Java/Prolog/Mathematica??
> then you are just making this up.
>
> You should check your underlying assumptions
> > carefully, and I suggest, before you jump on people's throats for their
> > questions, and accuse them of being clue-less and rudely almost call
them
> > stupid, to really take a hard look at yourself and how your language
> > reflects on yourself and more importantly on the organization which is
> > represented by your email address!
>
9======> Oh wow, and how does your mail reflect on AOL.com? Does Ted Turner
know
> about you?
>
> I don't think the Dean of your
> > university would be too happy with the kind of responses you have posted
on
> > this specific chain. It's not worthy of a University professor,
specially a
> > University of this Caliber!
>
10========> You have no idea what deans do, do you?
>
> You are erratic and irresponsible, just go back
> > and review your own pattern in addressing this question! Your constant
> > posturing and personalizing attitude is completely distasteful and not
> > appropriate of a scientific discussion, your mannerism and tone is
> > completely insulting and almost vicious at times. You are supposed to
be a
> > "TEACHER", not a DICTATOR! Your duty is to "promote" learning, not
> > "discourage" people from participating in discussions. Please be
respectful
> > of all the members in the group, even if you don't care about your own
> > respect. And always remember, you are writing as if the Dean of
University
> > was right there, reading it as you typed, then ask yourself if you would
> > write as you plan, if the answer is NO, then don't respond in such
> > pugnacious and distasteful manner!
>
11======> My assumption from textual analysis is that "Paul" is our friend
AZ,
> atazad02@hotmail.com who was the original poster, and provided the
> intemperate response a bit later. He really has a problem. Note that
> paul_tan@aol.com has never posted to this newsgroup, or any other
> newsgroup, before today. Isn't Google nice?
> >
> > Have a nice day Prof.
> > P.S. Remember, before you respond so quickly, take a moment and
contemplate,
> Consider it done.
> > what if the Dean of my University was reading my letter, would I still
> > respond this way???!!!!!! Hmmmmmm........ I wonder............
> > Again, Have a wonderful and pleasant day Prof.
> You too, AZ.
>
> RJF
>
12======> PS. Maybe we can get back to symbolic computation?
>
>
- Next message: Bill Rowe: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab"
- Previous message: Richard Fateman: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- In reply to: Richard Fateman: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- Next in thread: Dr. Agzamov: "Re: Mathematica Vs. Matlab. It is not a superset"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
