Solving Systems of Polynomial Equations

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Solving Systems of Polynomial Equations Appeared in IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, March 1994 Solving Systems of Polynomial Equations 1 Dinesh Manocha Department of Computer Science University of North Carolina, Chap el Hill, NC 27599-3175 Abstract: Current geometric and solid mo deling systems use semi-algebraic sets for de ning the b oundaries of solid ob jects, curves and surfaces, geometric constraints with mating rela- tionship in a mechanical assembly,physical contacts b etween ob jects, collision detection. It turns out that p erforming many of the geometric op erations on the solid b oundaries or interacting with geometric constraints is reduced to nding common solutions of the p oly- nomial equations. Current algorithms in the literature based on symb olic, numeric and geometric metho ds su er from robustness, accuracy or eciency problems or are limited to a class of problems only. In this pap er we present algorithms based on multip olynomial resultants and matrix computations for solving p olynomial systems. These algorithms are based on the linear algebra formulation of resultants of equations and in many cases there is an elegant re- lationship b etween the matrix structures and the geometric formulation. The resulting algorithm involves singular value decomp ositions, eigendecomp ositions, Gauss elimination etc. In the context of oating p oint computation their numerical accuracy is well under- stood. We also present techniques to make use of the structure of the matrices to improve the p erformance of the resulting algorithm and highlight the p erformance of the algorithms on di erent examples. 1 Supp orted in part by a Junior FacultyAward and DARPA Contract DAEA 18-90-C-0044 1 Intro duction Geometric and solid mo deling deal with issues of representation and manipulation of phys- ical ob jects. These elds have received much attention throughout the industrial and academic communities for more than three decades. Most of the current formulations of geometric ob jects curves and surfaces are in terms of p olynomial equations and in many application like b oundary computations, the problems are reduced to manipulating a p olynomial systems. Polynomial equations are used for representing semi-algebraic sets. The imp ortance of semi-algebraic sets has b een established in many other applications of geometric computation b esides b oundary representations. For example, the geometric constraints asso ciated with kinematic relationships in a mechanical assembly comp osed of prismatic and revolute joints de ne semi algebraic sets. Other applications include the representations of voronoi diagrams of set-theoretic mo dels [1], formulation of con gura- tion space of a rob ot in motion planning applications [2] etc. A fundamental problem in these geometric computations is that solving systems of p olynomial equations. In particu- lar, the problems of curveintersection, ray tracing curves and surfaces, inverse kinematics of serial or parallel mechanisms, collision detection, computing the distance from a p oint to a curve, nding a p oint on the bisector b etween two curves or a p oint equidistant from three curves and solving geometric constraint systems are reduced to nding ro ots of non- linear p olynomial equations [3, 4, 1]. The need for solving algebraic equations also arises in surface intersection algorithms, for nding starting p oints on each comp onent and lo cat- ing singularities [5, 6 ], manipulating o set curves and surfaces [7] and geometric theorem proving [5]. Most of these problems have b een extensively studied in the literature. The currently known techniques for solving non-linear p olynomial systems can b e classi- ed into symb olic, numeric and geometric metho ds. Symb olic metho ds based on resultants and Gr}obner bases algorithm can b e used for eliminating variables and thereby reducing the problem to nding ro ots of univariate p olynomials. These metho ds have their ro ots in algebraic geometry.However, the current algorithms and implementations are ecient for sets of low degree p olynomial systems consisting of up to three to four p olynomials only. The ma jor problem arises from the fact that computing ro ots of a univariate p oly- nomial can b e ill{conditioned for p olynomials of degree greater than 14 or 15, as shown by Wilkinson [8]. As a result, it is dicult to implement these algebraic metho ds using nite precision arithmetic and that slows down the resulting algorithm. As far as the use of algebraic metho ds in geometric and solid mo deling is concerned, the current viewp ointis that they have led to b etter theoretical understanding of the problems, but their practical impact is unclear [7, 9]. The numeric metho ds for solving p olynomial equations can b e classi ed into iterative metho ds and homotopy metho ds. Iterative techniques, like the Newton's metho d, are go o d for lo cal analysis only and work well if we are given go o d initial guess to each so- 1 lution. This is rather dicult for applications likeintersections or geometric constraint systems. Homotopy metho ds based on continuation techniques have a go o d theoretical background and pro ceed by following paths in the complex space. In theory, each path converges to a geometrically isolated solution. They have b een implemented and applied toavariety of applications [10]. In practice the current implementations have many prob- lems. The di erent paths b eing followed may not b e geometrically isolated and thereby causing problems with the robustness of the approach. Moreover, continuation metho ds are considered to b e computationally very demanding and at the moment restricted to solving dense p olynomial systems only. Recently, metho ds based on interval arithmetic have received a great deal of attention in computer graphics and geometric mo deling. The resulting algorithms are robust, though their convergence can b e relatively slow. For some particular applications, algorithms have b een develop ed using the geometric formulation of the problem. This includes sub division based algorithms for curves and surface intersection, ray tracing. In the general case sub division algorithms have limited applications and their convergence is slow. Their convergence has b een improved byB ezier clipping [11]. However, for low degree curveintersections algebraic metho ds have b een found to b e the fastest in practice. Similarly algorithms based on the geometric prop erties of mechanismshave b een develop ed for a class of kinematics problems, constraint systems and motion planning problems. In this pap er we present an algorithm for nding ro ots of p olynomial equations and demonstrate its p erformance on a numb er of applications. The algorithm uses resultants to eliminate variables from a system of p olynomial equations. The resultant formulations linearize a non-linear p olynomial system and the resultant, therefore, can b e expressed in terms of matrices and determinants. In particular, we show that the resultant of a system of p olynomial equations corresp onds to the determinantofa matrix polynomial and the problem of nding its ro ots can b e reduced to an eigenvalue problem or a generalized eigenvalue of a matrix p encil. There is an elegant relationship b etween the kernels of these matrix p olynomials and the variables b eing eliminated, which is b eing used for computing the rest of the variables and birational maps. We consider algorithms for sparse as well as dense p olynomial systems and illustrate them on the problems of curve and surface intersections, nding distance from a p oint to the curve, birational maps and geometric constraint systems. Later on we make use of the sparsity of the matrices to improve the p erformance of the algorithm. The resulting algorithms are robust in nature and their numerical accuracy is well understo o d. For most of the linear algebra problems, backward stable algorithms are known. This is in contrast with nding ro ots of high degree univariate p olynomials. Furthermore, ecient implementations of backward stable routines are available as part of LAPACK [12] and we used them in our applications. The rest of the pap er is organized in the following manner. In Section 2 we review the 2 results from elimination theory.We consider sparse as well as dense p olynomial systems. In Section 3, we brie y review some of the techniques from linear algebra and matrix computations used in the pap er. In Section 4 we showhow the resultants of p olynomial systems can b e expressed in terms of matrix p olynomials. Furthermore, there is a direct relationship b etween the variables b eing eliminated and the kernels of the matrix p oly- nomials. In Section 5 we illustrate the algorithm on intersection of curves and surfaces, nding distance of a p oint to a curve or a surface, representation of birational maps and geometric constraint systems. In Section 6 we discuss the p erformance and limitations of the current algorithm and highlight future directions for p erformance improvement and nally in Section 7 we conclude the pap er. 2 Background A semi-algebraic set is obtained by a nite numb er of Bo olean set op erations union, inter- section, di erence applied to half spaces de ned by algebraic inequalities. These sets are used to de ne solids and their b oundaries consist of zero, one and two dimensional algebraic sets in 3-space. Algebraic sets are de ned as common zeros of a system of p olynomial equations. Common examples of b oundary sets include parametric curves and surfaces de- ned byB ezier and B-spline formulations. For many op erations likeintersections, o sets and blends on these b oundary sets, the resulting algorithms involve computing common ro ots of p olynomial equations.
Recommended publications
  • Solving Equations; Patterns, Functions, and Algebra; 8.15A
    Mathematics Enhanced Scope and Sequence – Grade 8 Solving Equations Reporting Category Patterns, Functions, and Algebra Topic Solving equations in one variable Primary SOL 8.15a The student will solve multistep linear equations in one variable with the variable on one and two sides of the equation. Materials • Sets of algebra tiles • Equation-Solving Balance Mat (attached) • Equation-Solving Ordering Cards (attached) • Be the Teacher: Solving Equations activity sheet (attached) • Student whiteboards and markers Vocabulary equation, variable, coefficient, constant (earlier grades) Student/Teacher Actions (what students and teachers should be doing to facilitate learning) 1. Give each student a set of algebra tiles and a copy of the Equation-Solving Balance Mat. Lead students through the steps for using the tiles to model the solutions to the following equations. As you are working through the solution of each equation with the students, point out that you are undoing each operation and keeping the equation balanced by doing the same thing to both sides. Explain why you do this. When students are comfortable with modeling equation solutions with algebra tiles, transition to writing out the solution steps algebraically while still using the tiles. Eventually, progress to only writing out the steps algebraically without using the tiles. • x + 3 = 6 • x − 2 = 5 • 3x = 9 • 2x + 1 = 9 • −x + 4 = 7 • −2x − 1 = 7 • 3(x + 1) = 9 • 2x = x − 5 Continue to allow students to use the tiles whenever they wish as they work to solve equations. 2. Give each student a whiteboard and marker. Provide students with a problem to solve, and as they write each step, have them hold up their whiteboards so you can ensure that they are completing each step correctly and understanding the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Diffman: an Object-Oriented MATLAB Toolbox for Solving Differential Equations on Manifolds
    Applied Numerical Mathematics 39 (2001) 323–347 www.elsevier.com/locate/apnum DiffMan: An object-oriented MATLAB toolbox for solving differential equations on manifolds Kenth Engø a,∗,1, Arne Marthinsen b,2, Hans Z. Munthe-Kaas a,3 a Department of Informatics, University of Bergen, N-5020 Bergen, Norway b Department of Mathematical Sciences, NTNU, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway Abstract We describe an object-oriented MATLAB toolbox for solving differential equations on manifolds. The software reflects recent development within the area of geometric integration. Through the use of elements from differential geometry, in particular Lie groups and homogeneous spaces, coordinate free formulations of numerical integrators are developed. The strict mathematical definitions and results are well suited for implementation in an object- oriented language, and, due to its simplicity, the authors have chosen MATLAB as the working environment. The basic ideas of DiffMan are presented, along with particular examples that illustrate the working of and the theory behind the software package. 2001 IMACS. Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Geometric integration; Numerical integration of ordinary differential equations on manifolds; Numerical analysis; Lie groups; Lie algebras; Homogeneous spaces; Object-oriented programming; MATLAB; Free Lie algebras 1. Introduction DiffMan is an object-oriented MATLAB [24] toolbox designed to solve differential equations evolving on manifolds. The current version of the toolbox addresses primarily the solution of ordinary differential equations. The solution techniques implemented fall into the category of geometric integrators— a very active area of research during the last few years. The essence of geometric integration is to construct numerical methods that respect underlying constraints, for instance, the configuration space * Corresponding author.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students
    EDUCATOR’S PRACTICE GUIDE A set of recommendations to address challenges in classrooms and schools WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE™ Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students NCEE 2015-4010 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION About this practice guide The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) publishes practice guides in education to provide edu- cators with the best available evidence and expertise on current challenges in education. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) develops practice guides in conjunction with an expert panel, combining the panel’s expertise with the findings of existing rigorous research to produce spe- cific recommendations for addressing these challenges. The WWC and the panel rate the strength of the research evidence supporting each of their recommendations. See Appendix A for a full description of practice guides. The goal of this practice guide is to offer educators specific, evidence-based recommendations that address the challenges of teaching algebra to students in grades 6 through 12. This guide synthesizes the best available research and shares practices that are supported by evidence. It is intended to be practical and easy for teachers to use. The guide includes many examples in each recommendation to demonstrate the concepts discussed. Practice guides published by IES are available on the What Works Clearinghouse website at http://whatworks.ed.gov. How to use this guide This guide provides educators with instructional recommendations that can be implemented in conjunction with existing standards or curricula and does not recommend a particular curriculum. Teachers can use the guide when planning instruction to prepare students for future mathemat- ics and post-secondary success.
    [Show full text]
  • Step-By-Step Solution Possibilities in Different Computer Algebra Systems
    Step-by-Step Solution Possibilities in Different Computer Algebra Systems Eno Tõnisson University of Tartu Estonia E-mail: [email protected] Introduction The aim of my research is to compare different computer algebra systems, and specifically to find out how the students could solve problems step-by-step using different computer algebra systems. The present paper provides the preliminary comparison of some aspects related to step-by-step solution in DERIVE, Maple, Mathematica, and MuPAD. The paper begins with examples of one-step solutions of equations. This is followed by a cursory survey of useful commands, entering commands, programming etc. I hope that a more detailed and complete review will be composed quite soon. Suggestions for complementing the comparison are welcome. It is necessary to know which concrete versions are under consideration. In alphabetical order: DERIVE for Windows. Version 4.11 (1996) Maple V Release 5. Student Version 5.00 (1998) Mathematica for Students. Version 3.0 (1996) MuPAD Light. Version 1.4.1 (1998) Only pure systems (without additional packages, etc.) are under consideration. I believe that there may be more (especially interface-sensitive) possibilities in MuPAD Pro than in MuPAD Light. My paper is not the first comparison, of course. I found several previous ones in the Internet. For example, 1. Michael Wester. A review of CAS mathematical capabilities. 1995 There are 131 short problems covering a broad range of symbolic mathematics. http://math.unm.edu/~wester/cas/Paper.ps (One of the profoundest comparisons is probably M. Wester's book Practical Guide to Computer Algebra Systems.) 1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Equation-Solving: Linear, Quadratic, and Cubic
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library 2006 The evolution of equation-solving: Linear, quadratic, and cubic Annabelle Louise Porter Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project Part of the Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Porter, Annabelle Louise, "The evolution of equation-solving: Linear, quadratic, and cubic" (2006). Theses Digitization Project. 3069. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/3069 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EVOLUTION OF EQUATION-SOLVING LINEAR, QUADRATIC, AND CUBIC A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degre Master of Arts in Teaching: Mathematics by Annabelle Louise Porter June 2006 THE EVOLUTION OF EQUATION-SOLVING: LINEAR, QUADRATIC, AND CUBIC A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino by Annabelle Louise Porter June 2006 Approved by: Shawnee McMurran, Committee Chair Date Laura Wallace, Committee Member , (Committee Member Peter Williams, Chair Davida Fischman Department of Mathematics MAT Coordinator Department of Mathematics ABSTRACT Algebra and algebraic thinking have been cornerstones of problem solving in many different cultures over time. Since ancient times, algebra has been used and developed in cultures around the world, and has undergone quite a bit of transformation. This paper is intended as a professional developmental tool to help secondary algebra teachers understand the concepts underlying the algorithms we use, how these algorithms developed, and why they work.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing a Computer Algebra System Capable of Generating Pedagogical Step-By-Step Solutions
    DEGREE PROJECT IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2016 Constructing a Computer Algebra System Capable of Generating Pedagogical Step-by-Step Solutions DMITRIJ LIOUBARTSEV KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND COMMUNICATION Constructing a Computer Algebra System Capable of Generating Pedagogical Step-by-Step Solutions DMITRIJ LIOUBARTSEV Examenrapport vid NADA Handledare: Mårten Björkman Examinator: Olof Bälter Abstract For the problem of producing pedagogical step-by-step so- lutions to mathematical problems in education, standard methods and algorithms used in construction of computer algebra systems are often not suitable. A method of us- ing rules to manipulate mathematical expressions in small steps is suggested and implemented. The problem of creat- ing a step-by-step solution by choosing which rule to apply and when to do it is redefined as a graph search problem and variations of the A* algorithm are used to solve it. It is all put together into one prototype solver that was evalu- ated in a study. The study was a questionnaire distributed among high school students. The results showed that while the solutions were not as good as human-made ones, they were competent. Further improvements of the method are suggested that would probably lead to better solutions. Referat Konstruktion av ett datoralgebrasystem kapabelt att generera pedagogiska steg-för-steg-lösningar För problemet att producera pedagogiska steg-för-steg lös- ningar till matematiska problem inom utbildning, är vanli- ga metoder och algoritmer som används i konstruktion av datoralgebrasystem ofta inte lämpliga. En metod som an- vänder regler för att manipulera matematiska uttryck i små steg föreslås och implementeras.
    [Show full text]
  • Analytic Geometry
    CHAPTER 2 Analytic Geometry Euclid talks about geometry in Elements as if there is only one geometry. Today, some people think of there being several, and others think of there being infinitely many. Hopefully, after you get through this course, you will be in the second group. The people in the first group generally think of geometry as running from Euclid to Hilbert and then branching into Euclidean geometry, hyperbolic geometry and elliptic geometry. People in the second group understand that perfectly well, but include another, earlier brach starting with Rene Descartes (usually pronounced like “day KART”). This branch continues through people like Gauss and Riemann, and even people like Albert Einstein. In my mind, two of the major advances in the understanding of geometry were known to Descartes. One of these, was only known to Descartes, but Gauss, it seems, figured it out on his own, and we all followed him. The other you know very well, but you probably don’t know much about where it came from. This was the development of analytic geometry, geometry using coordinates. The other is not known very well at all, but Descartes noticed something that tells us that geometry should be built upon a general concept of curvature. What is generally called Modern geometry begins with Euclid and ends with Hilbert. The alternate path, the truly contemporary geometry, begins with Descartes and blossoms with Riemann. Note that, as is typical, modern usually means a long time ago. We’ll look at analytic geometry first, and Descartes’ other piece of insight will come later.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.2 Solving Equations Graphically
    333371_0202.qxp 12/27/06 11:03 AM Page 176 176 Chapter 2 Solving Equations and Inequalities 2.2 Solving Equations Graphically Intercepts, Zeros, and Solutions What you should learn ᭿ Find x- and y-intercepts of graphs of In Section 1.1, you learned that the intercepts of a graph are the points at which equations. the graph intersects the x- or y-axis. ᭿ Find solutions of equations graphically. ᭿ Find the points of intersection of two graphs. Definitions of Intercepts Why you should learn it 1. The point ͑a, 0͒ is called an x-intercept of the graph of an equation if it is a solution point of the equation. To find the x-intercept(s), set y Because some real-life problems involve equations that are difficult to solve equal to 0 and solve the equation for x. algebraically,it is helpful to use a graphing 2. The point ͑0, b͒ is called a y-intercept of the graph of an equation if utility to approximate the solutions of such equations.For instance,you can use a it is a solution point of the equation. To find the y-intercept(s), set x graphing utility to find the intersection point equal to 0 and solve the equation for y. of the equations in Example 7 on page 182 to determine the year during which the number of morning newspapers in the United States Sometimes it is convenient to denote the x-intercept as simply the x-coordi- exceeded the number of evening newspapers. nate of the point ͑a, 0͒ rather than the point itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 4: Differential Equations & Linear Algebra Notes
    Christian Parkinson GRE Prep: Diff. Eq. & Lin. Alg. Notes 1 Week 4: Differential Equations & Linear Algebra Notes After calculus, the most common topic on the math subject GRE is linear algebra, foll- wed by differential equations. Since the latter is a more natural continuation of calculus (and since it will take much less time), I cover it first. Differential Equations Definition 1 (Differential Equation). An ordinary differential equation is an equation of the form F (x; y; y0; y00; : : : ; y(n)) = 0 for some function F : Rn+2 ! R where y(k) denotes the kth derivative of y with respect to the independent variable x. The order of the differential equation is equal to the highest order derivative of u which appears; the above equation is nth order (assuming F does actually depend on its last variable). Note, we often replace y with u which can be thought to stand for \unknown." The goal then, is to find the unknown function which satisfies the equation. On the math subject GRE, questions are mostly limited to equations where the highest order derivative of the unknown function can be isolated; that is, equations of the form y(n) = f(x; y0; : : : ; y(n−1)): Many differential equations can be solved by simply recalling facts from calculus. Example 2. Solve the differential equations (a) u0 = u; (b) y00 = −4y: Solution. For (a), we can phrase the differential equation as a question: \What function will remain the same upon differentiating?" We recall from calculus that u(x) = ex is the function which is invariant under differentiation.
    [Show full text]
  • Elementary Algebra Review
    Placement Test Review Materials for 1 To The Student This workbook will provide a review of some of the skills tested on the COMPASS placement test. Skills covered in this workbook will be used on the Algebra section of the placement test. This workbook is a review and is not intended to provide detailed instruction. There may be skills reviewed that you will not completely understand. Just like there will be math problems on the placement tests you may not know how to do. Remember, the purpose of this review is to allow you to “brush-up” on some of the math skills you have learned previously. The purpose is not to teach new skills, to teach the COMPASS placement test or to allow you to skip basic classes that you really need. The Algebra test will assess you r mastery of operations using signed numbers and evaluating numerical and algebraic expressions. This test will also assess your knowledge of equations solving skills used to solve 1-variable equations and inequalities, solve verbal problems, apply formulas, solve a formula fro a particular variable, and fined “k” before you find the answer. You will also be tested on your knowledge of exponents, scientific notation, and radical expressions, as well as operations on polynomials. Furthermore, other elementary algebra skills that will be on the test include factoring polynomials, and using factoring to solve quadratic equations and simplify, multiply, and divide rational expressions. 2 Table of Contents Evaluating Expressions Using Order of Operations 4 Simplifying Complex Fractions
    [Show full text]
  • Higher-Order Linear Differential Equations
    Higher-Order Linear Differential Equations Sean Z. Roberson March 29, 2014 In Chapter 2, we examined a linear differential equation of the form y0 + P y = Q, where P and Q were functions of x (or whatever independent variable is used in the context of the problem). The solution was simple to construct by using an integrating factor. In Chapter 4, our focus shifted to higher-order linear differential equations (which I will abbreviate as DE from now on) which took a bit more work to solve. This paper will summarize the methods discussed in this chapter and will show how to apply each method. 1 Reduction of Order To begin, let's say that one (fundamental) solution of a differential equation is given. How can you find the rest? Doing so requires a substitution. In order to find a second solution to a second-order linear DE, assume that this second solution y2 is the product of some unknown function u and the known solution y1. With this assumption, we take derivatives (quite unfortunately, using the product rule multiple times) and substitute into the DE. Afterwards, the equation is now in terms of the unknown function u, but solely in its derivatives. The equation can then be solved by making the substitution w = u0, which reduces into a first-order DE. We illustrate this with an example. Example 1. x 00 Given that y1 = e is a solution to y − y = 0, find another solution. Solution 1. x 0 x 0 x Let us begin by assuming that this second solution has the form y2 = ue .
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Physics with Computer Algebra Systems
    AC 2009-334: TEACHING PHYSICS WITH COMPUTER ALGEBRA SYSTEMS Radian Belu, Drexel University Alexandru Belu, Case Western Reserve University Page 14.1147.1 Page © American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Teaching Physics with Computer Algebra Systems Abstract This paper describes some of the merits of using algebra systems in teaching physics courses. Various applications of computer algebra systems to the teaching of physics are given. Physicists started to apply symbolic computation since their appearance and, hence indirectly promoted the development of computer algebra in its contemporary form. It is therefore fitting that physics is once again at the forefront of a new and exciting development: the use of computer algebra in teaching and learning processes. Computer algebra systems provide the ability to manipulate, using a computer, expressions which are symbolic, algebraic and not limited to numerical evaluation. Computer algebra systems can perform many of the mathematical techniques which are part and parcel of a traditional physics course. The successful use of the computer algebra systems does not imply that the mathematical skills are no longer at a premium: such skills are as important as ever. However, computer algebra systems may remove the need for those poorly understood mathematical techniques which are practiced and taught simply because they serve as useful tools. The conceptual and reasoning difficulties that many students have in introductory and advanced physics courses is well-documented by the physics education community about. Those not stemming from students' failure to replace Aristotelean preconceptions with Newtonian ideas often stem from difficulties they have in connecting physical concepts and situations with relevant mathematical formalisms and representations, for example, graphical representations.
    [Show full text]