Slashdot Log In
Open Source Math Software For Education?
Posted by
timothy
on Mon Dec 13, 2004 07:04 PM
from the wading-through-it dept.
from the wading-through-it dept.
Rui Carmo writes "Now here's something you don't get asked every day, but which a friend happens to need for her kids: If you had to suggest Open-Source software for mathematics - somewhere from high-school to freshman level, and not merely for 'pure' mathematics, but also applicable to physics and statistics (the kids are considering going into Applied Maths and Engineering), what would you point people toward, assuming they have access to both Linux and Windows? I know this is a niche thing and that there is nothing out there that even comes close to Wolfram's excellent Mathematica (which I used on my old NeXTCube), but surely something along the lines of (or simpler than) Calculation Center exists?" The Knoppix-based Quantian might be a good place to start; what math software do you recommend?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Open Source Math Software For Education?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 605 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
(1)
|
2
Octave? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.vandewerken.id.au/)
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Octave? (Score:4, Interesting)
Every time a discussion of math packages comes up, Octave is always mentioned right away, but Euler [sourceforge.net] gets ignored. I'm curious why people seem to prefer Octave over Euler so much that Euler is virtually unknown.
Re:Octave? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.octave.org/
I've used Matlab extensively and can tell you that Octave and Matlab aren't perfectly compatible. However, a student who learns Octave can switch to Matlab without any effort whatsoever.
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://richardstanford.com/ | Last Journal: Monday April 05 2004, @06:03PM)
Octave [octave.org]
That, my friend, is a link.
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://masterdev.dyndns.dk/drslog | Last Journal: Thursday April 19 2007, @02:20PM)
Re:Octave? (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday February 11 2005, @04:09AM)
this: http://images.google.com/images?q=this%20is%20a%2
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?39901 | Last Journal: Tuesday August 03 2004, @11:07PM)
http://www.hugeurl.com/?ODg1M2YwMDM0NzNjMDgyNmJlM
For statisticians... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.notfud.com/)
R Project [r-project.org]
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said, the best software for math is no software at all. Paper and pencil, that's it. Over at my college, all engineers are required to go through four semesters of math (2 calc, diff eq. and linear algebra), and no calculators or tech tools are allowed for either course. And yes, we did need to plot slope fields, draw 3d representations of functions, etc... It's more important to know the concept of doing a problem than crunching numbers. The only time I use MATLAB is when I'm working on my design project-- I do the design, I setup the equations, MATLAB crunches the numbers for me.
Remember, number crunching != real math. Theory is the most important thing to learn.
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.adfinemfidelis.net/mongrel/ | Last Journal: Friday August 23 2002, @11:47PM)
How do you know you're better off for it? Maybe, if calculators had been allowed, you'd've been able to get to deeper concepts faster. Maybe you'd have been able to play with function and form and plots, and discovered chaos.
'Course, maybe not. But it seems to me that a blanket statement like yours is essentially unsupportable, and generally counterproductive. There's room for pen-and-paper, or even just brain work, but IMHO, there's room for integrators and plotters.
Put another way: When I took math in grade school, I had a teacher who also didn't believe in "high tech" -- like the pencil. We did everything in ink. Her theory was, if it was in ink, you couldn't correct a mistake -- so you wouldn't make any. It was an insane educational theory, of course, and bore no relation to what actually occured.
Re:Octave? (Score:5, Informative)
The guy's looking for a symbolic mathematics package. Why don't you recommend Excel for him why you're at it? Heavens.
Re:Look again (Score:4, Funny)
mvdw: Have you considered a Toyota Camry?
Anonymous Coward: Oh, geez, does anyone know the difference between an off road vehicle and a sedan?
cameldrv: High-end off road vehicles have become more sedan-like lately.
Rui Carmo: WTF?
R (GNU S) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:R (GNU S) (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.bmo-web.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday August 18 2004, @08:37PM)
I was going to suggest R.
To the person who claims it is a poor choice for High Schoolers, I disagree, especially if statistics is of interest. It forces you to actually THINK about what you are doing with your models instead of being able to run, willy nilly, any old analysis on any old data (vis-a-vis SPSS).
It is also good because it is VERY robust in its data import capabilities (excel, spss, etc), and is very strong at doing correct analyses.
There are some caveats:
Need to program
Need to be willing to really learn
Poor documentation
Memory intensive for large datasets.
This last item needs some explanation: R, unlike other statistical packages, loads the entire data set into memory, and performs all analyses there, instead of accessing the disk more frequently. This results in large datasets taking some serious memory, especially once you start working on complex analyses. If you plan to be using 5,000+ observations (which isn't all that uncommon in some fields), you should plan on having a fairly beefy computer.
The upside is that it can provide much more information than spss could ever hope for. Now, if someone would just finish the plugin for kalc or gnumeric that would allow direct access, that would be awesome.
(For R afficianados who aren't aware, check out ESS-Emacs Speaks Statistics--it's great for unix coders, but unnecessary for win32 stats folks).
Maxima (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Maxima (Score:5, Informative)
(http://geocities.com/nelstomlinson | Last Journal: Wednesday January 22 2003, @01:19AM)
It is being actively developed [sourceforge.net]. While William Schelter was maintaining it (for 19 lonely years), development was very slow indeed. I gather that most of the work was done by him, and some of his graduate students. Since his death in 2001, a number of other people have come on board, and there is a lot of catching up to do.
Some documentation [sourceforge.net]has been rewritten, a great many bugs have been squashed, the package has been ported to several Lisps (yes, it does matter to users), there has been at least one new Emacs mode written for it, it can be used with Texmacs, and so on. Some of the people who are working on it are big names in their spheres, like Richard Fateman [berkeley.edu], who worked on the original Macsyma.
Version 5.9.1 was released in September '04, and the next big step will be the GREAT SOURCE DOWNCASING. Maxima is so old that most of it is written in all caps. There is a lot to do to bring it into the 21st century, and most of what's being done right now is behind-the-scenes stuff.
As you say, it's decent software now. It's fully usable, with a useful GUI for Windows (developed on Schelter's watch, as I recall). It is probably better for memory intensive work than Maple or Mathematica; that's what initially got me started using it.
Re:Maxima (Score:4, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Sunday April 04 2004, @09:33PM)
GraphCalc is good (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.hanburger.net/)
Math Software? (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole technology upgrade the schools have been getting doesn't seem to be making learning more efficient. It seems like a big waste of money.
If a kid doesn't spend time studying his books, why would he start studying his software?
Re:Math Software? (Score:4, Interesting)
I think a problem might be that you associate highschool math with trig. Using Mathematica in a self-based course of instruction they can move as fast as is natural for them. Why not let the kids move past dull rote mechanical skills and learning by doing something useful?
Is there really any reason why (the undergrad intro) QM can't be taught in HS using visualization and moderate Linear Algebra skills? I mean, if they can get as far as DiffEq? Isn't it more the *style* of instruction (chalk vs. powerpoint), and what we have them do for homework that holds them back more than the concepts?
gnuplot (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://stephan.sugarmotor.org/)
They can explore lots of stuff just with gnuplot.
bc is also pretty good - simple to learn and use.
Who needs all the flashy stuff?
Stephan
Why software? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday November 28 2005, @12:21PM)
Re:Why software? (Score:4, Insightful)
Fractals are merely a novelty at a high school level. What can students struggling with pre-calc do with fractals other than gawk at pretty pictures? To appreciate them beyond "hey, it's glittery...oooh, color cycling....drool" takes a motivation and interest not present in most students.
Re:Why software? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the worst way. "Hey, those fractals look pretty cool, I think I'll sign up for this advanced fractals course." --semester begins-- "Holy flying fluke, Batman, where did these equations come from?!?" --drops class, ends with less motivation than before--
bc (Score:4, Funny)
For a high school freshman . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Come back when they're in college and ask again.
KFG
Math.com? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://brianallen.isagenix.com/)
I'd love a math tutor style of program that would fluidly walk you through from basic math all the way to calc and trig, automatically adjusting to your rate of learning based on little exercises.
You want Maxima (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the closest thing I know of to an OSS Mathematica. It is to Mathematica what The Gimp is to Photoshop. Namely, it's a fair way behind the front runner but still very usable.
OT: Learn the math, then use the tools (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/~davidwr/journal/ | Last Journal: Friday November 09, @09:19PM)
If possible, students should learn the principles behind the math before they are allowed to use fancy tools like calculators and computers.
My high school teacher made us learn logarithms and trigonometry using a pencil, graph paper, and tables, THEN we got to use a calculator. As for calculus, we did all our graphs by hand, sub-$200 graphing calculators weren't available back then.
I hope you get some good answers in this thread.
a good question deserves a good answer. (Score:3, Interesting)
P.S. I think they're looking for new leadership to continue to project. Please help if you can.
I've always loved this quote (Score:5, Insightful)
Just wondering
Have you checked out the pricing on math products (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
My main issue with this pricing structure is that a hobbyist like myself simply can't justify the expense. And that's very unfortunate.
Re:I've always loved this quote (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://mclarenhome.com/~dougmc/)
Maxima (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, and it's GPL, and it works on Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X (via Fink).
BTW, you probably know this, but if you can afford Mathematica or a Math'ca-based product, or at least a student license, it's going to be a lot better and more powerful than any OSS math product today. Math'ca is really an excellent product. Unfortunately, the price matches its quality.
Mathematica, of course (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.mathpuzzle.com/)
Pari-gp, Lisp and interfaces (Score:4, Interesting)
Lisp is also prominently absent but I agree with what Chaitin [auckland.ac.nz] says about it being the natural computer language for mathematically minded computer users. Actually I'm surprised it isn't more popular with other software developers - it seems to me to make any kind of programming easier and more pleasurable.
People who've mentioned Maxima also haven't said anything much about graphical (non-plotting) interfaces to it. I like imaxima in emacs and also TeXmacs - which will act as a graphical front end to many other mathematical programs.
Maxima is your best bet (Score:4, Interesting)
Quantian article (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.mathpuzzle.com/)
Perl Data Language (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're already teaching your kids perl (for some strange reason), pdl adds vector numeric features and access to all sorts of numeric libraries.
It's good for number crunching and data display.