Mathematica and MatLab Differences

  • Context: MATLAB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Philosophaie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mathematica Matlab
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion highlights the differences in matrix computations between Mathematica and MatLab, specifically in the context of solving a Riemann matrix. The equation provided, involving the Christoffel symbols \(\Gamma(i,j,k)\), illustrates the complexity of the calculations. The user found that MatLab produced different results than Mathematica due to its simplification process. To achieve consistent results, the user utilized the 'simplify' command in MatLab to match the output from Mathematica.

PREREQUISITES
  • Familiarity with Riemannian geometry and Christoffel symbols
  • Understanding of matrix operations in Mathematica and MatLab
  • Knowledge of differentiation in the context of tensor calculus
  • Experience with simplification commands in MatLab
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the 'simplify' command in MatLab for matrix operations
  • Explore the differences in symbolic computation between Mathematica and MatLab
  • Study Riemannian geometry and its applications in physics
  • Learn about tensor calculus and its implementation in both Mathematica and MatLab
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers working with matrix computations and tensor calculus, particularly those using Mathematica and MatLab for complex mathematical modeling.

Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
I am going thru the same itterations for solving a Matrix in both Mathematica and MatLab. MatLab gives a different answer.

I am given a matrix:

[tex]\Gamma^{i}_{jk} or \Gamma(i,j,k)[/tex] that is correct.

The Equation for the resultant matrix is:

[tex]R^{i}_{jkl}=\Gamma(i,k,r)*\Gamma(r,j,l)-\Gamma(i,l,r)*\Gamma(r,j,k)+d/dx^{k}\Gamma(i,j,l)-d/dx^{l}\Gamma((i,j,k)[/tex]

with starting from summing the r then i and j and k and l.

I am trying to do the same in MatLab as in Mathematica but cannot get them to agree.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I answered it for myself. Matlab didn't simplify the whole way. I needed to use the simple command to simpllify the whole riemann matrix to get the same results as Mathematica.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K