Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Software

Open Source Math Software For Education? 605

Posted by timothy 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This discussion has been archived.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? More

Open Source Math Software For Education?

Comments Filter:

  • Octave? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mvdw ( 613057 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:06PM (#11077301) Homepage
    What about octave (free Matlab clone)?

  • R (GNU S) (Score:5, Informative)

    by Neil Blender ( 555885 ) <neilblender@gmail.com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:06PM (#11077302)
    R statistical language [ucla.edu]

    • Re:R (GNU S) (Score:3, Informative)

      by Kludge ( 13653 )
      R is very good for statistical coding. A good number of professional statiticians code for the project and an even greater number actually use it, and it will run almost any S code written.

      I've used it since graduate school and in my two subsequent professional research jobs. Currently I use it for running statistical simulations in parallel across our 45 node cluster.

    • Re:R (GNU S) (Score:4, Informative)

      by DarkSarin ( 651985 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @10:38PM (#11078397) Homepage Journal
      Dangit, you beat me to it!

      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).

      • For 3D fun (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Kludge ( 13653 )
        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

        I agree here. Many people are posting that these mathematical sorts of programs aren't for high schoolers. While it is true that such programs shouldn't be used as a crutch for passing math class, it is also important to teach students programming, in particular mathematical programming. For this R would be good.

        Poor documentat

  • Maxima (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:07PM (#11077314)
    Look at http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net].

    • Re:Maxima (Score:3, Informative)

      by willy134 ( 682318 )
      I have played with Maxima a little bit. I think it is a decent peice of software. It started out as a government research app that was later open sourced. Unfortunately development is slow (if even existent) but on windows it did a fairly good/fast job of calculating funny integrals. They plotting features are decent also.

      It is much closer to mathematica than matlab. I don't know how it compares to mathcad.

      Hey it is free so at least give it a try.

      • Re:Maxima (Score:5, Informative)

        by RealAlaskan ( 576404 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:05PM (#11077782) Homepage Journal
        I have played with Maxima a little bit. I think it is a decent peice of software. It started out as a government research app that was later open sourced. Unfortunately development is slow (if even existent)...

        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:3, Interesting)

        by antiMStroll ( 664213 )
        "I don't know how it compares to mathcad."

        Is there GPL software comparable to MathCAD? Due to the pioneering work of Martin King (http://www.quarter-wave.com/ [quarter-wave.com]) the latter has become popular among DIY builders for modeling transmission lines speakers. Most though can't justify the ~$1000 for hobby software and use MathCAD's crippled demo, Explorer 8.

      • Re:Maxima history (Score:3, Interesting)

        by xtermin8 ( 719661 )
        Macsyma was actually started at MIT, written in lisp, part of Project MAC. At least two different versions came out, Maxima was from the Department of Energy's version, which has been open sourced. Another version was owned by Symbolics, then was spun off into its own company. I beleive there's still another version and MIT still retains the rights to it. Feel free to correct me on any of this- but for sure the software has a long and tangled history.

    • Re:Maxima (Score:2, Informative)

      by YGingras ( 605709 )
      I'd like to add that Maxima support formated output when run inside GNU TeXmacs [texmacs.org]. You get top quality homeworks with really little effort.

    • Re:Maxima (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Skjellifetti ( 561341 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @11:10PM (#11078537) Journal
      My dad was a physicist at ORNL who started using the DOE MIT version of Maxima in the early 1970s. He thought Maxima was the greatest thing since sliced bread. His division hired a new Phd at one point whose dissertation had taken 18 months to derive by hand. When he joined ORNL, he ran the problem through Maxima. Only took an afternoon and he was quite relieved when Maxima got the same answer he had gotten by hand.

  • GraphCalc is good (Score:5, Informative)

    by theteenager ( 810778 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:07PM (#11077316) Homepage
    GraphCalc [graphcalc.com] is a good graphing program. It might not do everything in math, but it graphs pretty nicely.

  • Math Software? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jtbauki ( 838979 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:08PM (#11077319)

    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?

  • gnuplot (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sugarmotor ( 621907 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:11PM (#11077342) Homepage
    What are these "kids" trying to learn?

    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)

    by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:11PM (#11077344) Journal
    There were no computers in my middle/high school math classes and I learned math just fine. What is your friend trying to do that couldn't be done better with pen and paper and old fashioned teaching? Computers aren't a panacea.

    • Re:Why software? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Zangief ( 461457 )
      Because there are things that simply cannot be done without a computer. Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.

      Plus, there are other cool things you can do. Long equations can be simnplefied, you don't have to write so much, and you can concentrate in the mathematics, instead of in the often tedious mechanics.

      • Re:Why software? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by upsidedown_duck ( 788782 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:36PM (#11077552)
        Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.

        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.
      • I agree that Long equations can be simnplefied, you don't have to write so much, and you can concentrate in the mathematics, instead of in the often tedious mechanics. , but for a student learning math at the level that the poster seems to be implying, those "tedious mechancs" are what they are supposed to be learning.
    • I completely understand your reasoning and agree with you if we're talking high school calculus. But programming (or at least a working knowledge of) in Mathematica or Matlab is almost a requirement these days at the higher levels. I've noticed that now that I'm in grad school, we use numerical methods a whole lot more. In fact, I'm taking a numerical methods class next quarter.

    • Re:Why software? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by spac3manspiff ( 839454 )
      Yeah, and guys in the stone age did math with rocks and did fine too.

      But I think progress education of younger generations if we allow them to use new technology. Introducing math to kids in middle school allows them to become more familiar with the technology. Like, my dad can do math perfectly with pen and pencil but can use a computer or graph on a calculator. That shows the difference in generations.
    • That's why they're called blackboreds! =P

      I mean, you can dictate/write a bunch of equations to some bored kids throwing paper planes at each other, or....

      You could do some interactive presentation where a kid can ask you: "and what happens if you do this and that?" and he gets the answer plotted in color and 3D, right away (Given, that you KNOW how to use the math program, of course)

      I remember my image processing classes at college. I loved to write my own filters using MATLAB and see how the resulting

    • Re:Why software? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Morganth ( 137341 )
      While I agree that technology in Math helps for some things, especially visualization of otherwise abstract concepts, technology can also really impede Math learning.

      I know this. I'm a public high school graduate who is now in Computer Science and feels as if his Math background is lacking, to say the least.

      Yet, I got a 5 on AP Calculus exam, got As in my Calc class, but don't remember a damn thing from Calculus. Why? I mastered the fucking calculator.

      Armed with a graphing calculator (TI-89 preferred)

  • python (Score:2, Informative)

    by viva_fourier ( 232973 )
    As an avid Matlab user, octave would be a good realm for lower dimensional mathematics. But, there's a nice foundation being set for python as an interpretive math environment. For the matlab lackies, matplotlib provides Matlab-like plotting support. For windows, grab the enthought compilation -- for linux, piecemeal together your environment starting with SciPy, MayaVi, and Matplotlib.

  • bc (Score:4, Funny)

    by bbh ( 210459 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:11PM (#11077354)
    bc [gnu.org]

  • For a high school freshman . . . (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kfg ( 145172 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:11PM (#11077355)
    I wouldn't recommend software at all. I would recommend something we call "pencil and paper." Learning mathematics (and reading music, and a number of other such undertakings) is as much a mechanical skill as an intellectual one and the quickest way to the brain is through the fingers.

    Come back when they're in college and ask again.

    KFG
    • I wouldn't recommend software at all. I would recommend something we call "pencil and paper." Learning mathematics (and reading music, and a number of other such undertakings) is as much a mechanical skill as an intellectual one and the quickest way to the brain is through the fingers.

      Word to that. When I was in school, we couldn't even use calculators. I could calculate the cube root of large numbers to several significant digits with paper and pencil.
      • Word to that. When I was in school, we couldn't even use calculators. I could calculate the cube root of large numbers to several significant digits with paper and pencil.

        It can be done by someone who can do arithmetic---and knows how. I don't know how, but I know Newton's method of root solving, so I can come up with a way quickly.

        To find the cube root of c (which I'll call x), we need to solve x^3 - c = 0. We can do this by coming up with a guess t[0] and recursively saying that t[n+1] = t[n] - (x^3-c)/

    • I would recommend something we call "pencil and paper."

      agreed
      First you need to program the wetware (mind), then you can use the software to examine the side effects of the principles and formulas you learned. I think that the latter used to be known as applied math.

      "In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however...."

    • No.

      Software is useful. As a freshman in trig, I was learning calculus on my own, and Mathematica helped. There was one derivative in particular which I couldn't figure out; after using Mathematica to find the answer, the method whereby you reach that answer came to me a few days later -- it was much more obvious from the answer than from the question. There have been countless discussions between my friend and I as to how Mathematica arrived at a certain solution.

      You try doing large integrals with pencil-
      • Of course some integrals are hard. That is why there is a table of integrals in the front (and back) cover of almost every calculus book. However, that does not mean you don't have to learn the method to solve those integrals.

        Learning is MUCH more complicated than simply absorbing the ability to do certain well defined tasks. There are abilities gained when working hard math problems that are far more important than the math problems themselves, at least in the case of difficult integrals.

        Having done '
      • I was learning calculus on my own
        If you're learning calculus on your own, you're going to expect things to be different. For people who have the luxury of a class where they learn calculus, I think you'll find your argument doesn't hold. Certainly I recall that in second and third year calc, when asked to compute a derivative or an integral we would usually be given the answer. That way the lecturer could ask a more complex problem that tested more techniques and still expect the right percentage of stud

  • Maxima and Axiom (Score:2, Interesting)

    by metalogic ( 445469 )
    Maxima [sourceforge.net] and Axiom [axiom-developer.org].

  • Paper? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by csubear ( 802505 )
    How about a book, paper, and pen? Maybe a white board to write examples on?

    Really, why do you need software to teach kids math, engineers where trained with out the aid of computer software for years.
  • I've seen this but haven't yet used it. It seems pretty cool:

    Genius Math Tool [jirka.org]

  • Scilab (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Scilab http://scilabsoft.inria.fr/ [inria.fr] is an open source clone of matlab available for both Linux and Windows. I use it almost daily. 99.9% of what you do in Matlab can be done in Scilab for free.

  • Math.com? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DigitalRaptor ( 815681 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:15PM (#11077383)
    I hate to state the obvious, but Math.com [math.com] is where I've spent some time brushing up on all the math I've forgotten.

    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.

  • I used both of these tools in my math and stats courses while pursuing my undergrad in CS. I found Octave to be much easier to use than Mathematica or Matlab (both of which were in the computer labs at school), and since it was free, I could easily make use of it at home, so the lab closing times didn't affect me at all.

    One major problem that could arise is whether or not your instructor will allow you to hand in homework in either language. Some professors at the school would only allow you to hand in h
    • NumAnalII was taught in MatLab, but Octave worked for me. Never had any problems. Loved the emacs modes! Write scripts in one emacs window, run an octave process in another emacs window...send the current line (or function, or selected text...etc) to the process for evaluation. Very sweet.
  • Pencil + graph paper + ruler + eraser + brain

  • You want Maxima (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cabraverde ( 648652 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:18PM (#11077418)
    Maxima [sourceforge.net]:

    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)

    by davidwr ( 791652 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:19PM (#11077421) Homepage Journal
    I know this is a bit off-topic, but it can't be overemphasized:

    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.
    • What is more fundamental about a book of tables than, say, a sliderule? I'd suggest that the sliderule is *more* fundamental. Likewise, the graphs are more *real* than tables.

      If you want to teach people to calculate without necessarily understanding, you can do it either way. But if you want them to see what it really means, then *show* them. Use graphics. Use animated vector fields and potential fields. Will it help them calculate a cube root swiftly by hand? No. Will it help them get through Ja
  • On the high school to freshman level? Take software (and calculators) out of the kid's hands. It will only hurt his education. If anything at all, get him an RPN calculator -- it still requires thinking in order to evaluate expressions, the kind of thinking that improves mathematical skills and understanding of the task at hand, instead of the kind of thinking that goes "I plug and chug and get an answer."

    Without doubt, I am certain that my getting an RPN calculator (replacing a non-RPN calculator) whil
    • Actually I disagree with your first three sentences, but totally agree with the rest of your post. RPN is a much more natural approach once you get used to it.

  • I don't get it... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hexcentric1 ( 688709 )
    There are any number of ways to learn math; most of them involve exploring the relationships between numbers and the physical world. This means teaching someone how to think about things. Math software does not teach anyone how to think; it is a tool for accomplishing a goal. First the student learns arithmetic, then algebra, geometry, trig, calculus, and so on. Once the concepts are understood, the foundation is sound, and the student *knows* math, then, and only then, does math software become useful. It

  • ...why not take advantage of the numerous and generous educational discounts available to teachers and students? That way you get manuals and support, and the instructor doesn't have to waste time on configuration, installation, or troubleshooting. Why does it have to be open source? Is she (your friend) worried about bad math being put in or is she going to extend the software in some way?

  • a good question deserves a good answer. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tloh ( 451585 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:23PM (#11077461)
    I'd like to recommend the very exellent GNUWin project [gnuwin.epfl.ch]. They are a great collection (consisting entirely of GNU software) of applications for not only scientific computing, but also just basic general computing on the Windows platform. Check out the list [gnuwin.epfl.ch] of applications on the two CD set as well as the current wishlist. It includes many of the programs already named. Latest ISO is the Nov 30 release package.

    P.S. I think they're looking for new leadership to continue to project. Please help if you can.

  • but there is a reason for that. You have them do it on paper, and after they have learned how to do that then show them the computer software(Though I personally would recommend they just buy one of those newfangled Ti calcs, it doesn't have quite the set of features that the math software has but the UI is much nicer IMO), but anyway I digress.
    If they learn what the software is actually doing first, then they will appreciate it that much more, but even more importantly, they will be able to do stuff wher
  • The R Project I think has shown itself to be a great set of tools (and growing). It has a bit of a learning curve, but it's fairly robust (especially for social scientists)

  • I second the suggestions for pencil, paper, learning, and critical thinking. Whenever I started using software to do math, I pretty much always wasted hours tweaking parameters without doing much real work. Why do a proper optimization analysis, when it is so easy to change to numbers and re-run the program?

    Using computers early on in math encourages laziness, unless the student really does have a firm grasp of the math and can use the computer for real discovery. Such firm understanding is rare among s

  • boobies! (SFW) (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 )
    It's not exactly software, though it is soft. And luscious. Check out bikini calculus [howtodogirls.com].

  • I've always loved this quote (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MerlynEmrys67 ( 583469 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:28PM (#11077502)
    I know this is a niche thing and that there is nothing out there that even comes close to
    Insert excellent software that does just what you want , but surely something along the lines of (or simpler than) Insert Open source project here
    So, what is wrong with people doing a good job and creating value, getting a little bit of that value back so they can pay rent ?

    Just wondering

    • Have you checked out the pricing on math products (Score:4, Interesting)

      by melted ( 227442 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:03PM (#11077769) Homepage
      Have you checked out the pricing on math products lately? I have. It's freakin' stratospheric, and then they nickel and dime you for extensions.

      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)

      by dougmc ( 70836 ) <dougmc+slashdot@frenzied.us> on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:07PM (#11077800) Homepage
      So, what is wrong with people doing a good job and creating value, getting a little bit of that value back so they can pay rent ?
      Nothing. Exactly like there's nothing wrong with telling people that there's something out there that does exactly what they want and is expensive, and that there is something with some/much/most/all of the functionality but it's Free, Open Source or Cheap.
    • So, what is wrong with people doing a good job and creating value, getting a little bit of that value back so they can pay rent ?

      That would be the part where they make it impossible for anybody else to develop the thing any further, so that it suits their needs when the original developer has no interest in them. There's a reason why proprietary software sucks.

  • For my engineering classes I have never needed anything more than octave (GNU matlab clone).

    The only time I even needed that was for signal analysis plotting holes and doing edge detection on images and so on, so it was hardly a frequent occurance. Everything else (structures, electonics and so on) was solvable on paper with a casio graphic calculator (not for the graphing but for the ability to store 50+ variables, saving a lot of re-entry).

    The exceptions to this are of course applications like CFD but u
  • For statistics software that's free, you're not going to get much better than R [r-project.org]. R is an implementation of the S language; so is S-Plus, but that will cost you. R is awesome for many things.

    If you have data of any type and want to easily prepare graphical summaries, R is good for that. For beginning students in statistics, it can look up critical values for all the distributions so you don't have to use the blasted tables. It also has functions for everything you'll see in an intro class (regression, A
  • The Maxima project [sourceforge.net] isn't Mathematica, but it's not bad, and it's GPL. For general purpose computer algebra packages your choices are Maple, Mathematica, and Maxima, and only Maxima is free or Free.

    Having said that, if the kid wants to do math, don't let him near a computer. If he needs a computer or a calculator or anything but some paper and a pencil, it's not math.


  • Ok, I'll bite.

    I don't recommend anything - at that level, you should be reading books.

    No software out there can replicate or replace the skills and discipline you need to do math.

    Reducing the workload by leaning on a crutch will only hurt you in the end. [The exception, of course, is Gnuplot: if you can figger out Gnuplot, you probably understand things well enough to treat it as the tool it is and not a crutch.]
  • As several commentators have suggested, R [r-project.org] is a terrific platform for statistical computing. Here's a link to a blog post that, in part, contains more information [crookedtimber.org] about R, in particular links to some of the textbooks (both free and commercially published) that use it to do statistics. R is one of those open-source projects that's absolutely first class but doesn't get so much exposure in the mainstream because it's a bit specialized.
  • The problem with your question is that "software for mathematics" can mean different things.

    If you mean software that will help someone solve mathematical problems, then if you understand how to program then really any programming language will do. An interpreted language with lots of high-level libraries (like Python with NumPy and SciPy) is my personal preference. Also, one nice resource is this online integral doer [integrals.com]. Especially good for quick and easy cheating on calculus homework!

    If you don't underst

  • Maxima (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Geoffreyerffoeg ( 729040 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:47PM (#11077633)
    At National Mu Alpha Theta this summer (a math tournament), I had brought my OS X laptop which happened to have Maxima [sourceforge.net] on it. I use Mathematica at home, but I only have the Win32 version. Maxima is difficult to learn (not user-friendly, but it's almost as powerful as Mathematica -- in fact, its predecessor, Macsyma, was one of the first CASes, predating Mathematica. I used Maxima to verify some lengthy integrals after one test when the answer posted differed significantly from my answer.

    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)

    by Ed Pegg ( 613755 ) <ed@mathpuzzle.com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:10PM (#11077814) Homepage
    Full disclosure: I work for Wolfram Research [wolfram.com]. But oh -- the irony! I am also a columnist for Math Games at maa.org [maa.org], and I wrote an article about the Quantian Distribution [maa.org]. I didn't want a spammer to start using quantian.org just as the distro was getting popular, so I bought it, and provided a redirect to the main Quantian site. So now, I'm getting doubly Slashdotted. Huzzah. A student should definitely be getting Mathematica for Students [wolfram.com] -- but check with the college first. They might be on a Mathematica Campus [wolfram.com], and can get it for free.

  • Pari-gp, Lisp and interfaces (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Wolfbone ( 668810 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:30PM (#11077903)
    No-one's mentioned the superb pari-gp [u-bordeaux.fr] yet. It'll draw graphs using gnuplot and unlike much other software of it's type it has excellent documentation.

    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.

    • Haskell (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sleepingsquirrel ( 587025 )
      Haskell [haskell.org] is also a great language for performing math. It'd be hard to get a nicer notation for the factorial than something like this...
      fac n = product [1..n]

      • Re:Haskell (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Wolfbone ( 668810 )
        Yes - it looks conceptually attractive and it appears possible to have the all-important (to me anyway) interpreter mode. I always found doing any kind of programming but especially mathematical work a real drag until I discovered these kinds of language: CMUCL and SLIME radically improved every aspect of any kind of programming for me.

  • Maxima is your best bet (Score:4, Interesting)

    by amundson ( 21602 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:47PM (#11078032)
    I lead the Maxima project, http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]. Maxima is a full-featured GPL'd computer algebra system under active development. We don't hear much from people who want to use Maxima for high school mathematics, but we would welcome the input.

  • Quantian article (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ed Pegg ( 613755 ) <ed@mathpuzzle.com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:58PM (#11078124) Homepage
    I own the quantian.org domain. The following is from my article on the Quantian Distribution [maa.org]. Here is a brief run down of links, programs, and other goodies in Quantian.

  • Perl Data Language (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Kludge ( 13653 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @10:57PM (#11078479)
    http://pdl.perl.org/

    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.

Slashdot Top Deals

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Close