Re: Mathematica question
From: AKT (akt_at_null.void)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: alistair_at_goforit64.fsnet.co.uk: "Re: Feynman diagrams - a new interpretation"
- Previous message: José Carlos Santos: "Re: Mathematica question"
- In reply to: José Carlos Santos: "Re: Mathematica question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:36:24 GMT
José Carlos Santos <jcsantos@fc.up.pt> wrote:
: > Maybe OP didn't know about the mathematica ng. However, his
: > choice of physics and math groups was reasonable; that's where
: > one would expect to find many mathematica users.
:
: Then sci.physics would be more reasonable than sci.physics.particle.
Why, sci.physics is primarily about politics, elections, racism,
holocaust, Islam, terrorism, UFO's, underground railroad, etc? :-)
I see no reason to believe that one is less likely to find mathematica
users in s.p.p than in s.p . Maybe OP is a regular visitor to s.p.p;
given several reasonable options I would tilt in favor of the groups I
read regularly anyway.
I am sure you'd have chosen differently. So would I (I would have added
sci.math.symbolic). But OP made reasonable choices.
- Next message: alistair_at_goforit64.fsnet.co.uk: "Re: Feynman diagrams - a new interpretation"
- Previous message: José Carlos Santos: "Re: Mathematica question"
- In reply to: José Carlos Santos: "Re: Mathematica question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|