Re: ti-86 vs. ti-89
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ti-86 vs. ti-89
On 13 Apr 1999 04:06:58 GMT, jemfinch02@aol.com (Jemfinch02) wrote:
>>Whew! I guess you write on paper in a much different manner than me.
>
>Yes, but I wanted to be absolutely clear about the method. It involves about
>10 seconds of actual working (if that)
>
>>I think I like the ti's better, to calculate the same integral, I just
>>type int(e^x,x,0,1) where int is the integral symbol.
>
>Well, the HP gives you that option, but what if you forget whether the limits
>go before or after the variable? if the variable of integration goes before
or
>after the integrand? Instead of memorizing some arbitrary order, you can
write
>it in your calc just as you would on paper.
Or you can look at the help built into the ti's. And I fail to see
how it is an "arbitrary order" as you claim. The order reasoning
behing the order is pretty obvious to me, what's always required,
followed by optional terms.
>
>>I must admit that the TI doesn't give me the options of going through
>>all the options you describe, but I'm not sure I would miss those
>>gyrations.
>
>I wouldn't exactly call an intuitive input method "gyrations"
It seemed pretty kludgy to me.
>
>>And also with the TI, I don't have to go through all the gyrations to
>>calculate an indefinite integral symbolically either, for example, to
>>get the integral of e^x, I just type int(e^x,x) and press enter.
>
>As you would on the HP with add on programs: Erable, Alg48, etc.
So symbolic integration is an area where an HP is lacking out of the
box?
>
>>The TI requires none of the 8 step process the HP requires, including
>>entering 0 and the variable to integrate wrt, and later removing them
>>by converting the expression to an object, and using the drpn command
>>whatever that is.
>
>You really ought to research your statements before you make them.
I did. I consulted the manual for my HP48GX. Specifically, page
20-9. I have a TI 92+, TI89, and a 48GX, and I choose to use the 92+
exclusively. Something I've noticed with HP users, is they generally
carry and use multiple calcs.
>I have used
>a TI-82 for longer than I've used my HP,
>and I can use a TI-89 as proficiently
>as any other TI-89 user.
Really?
>I wouldn't think of posting something that I don't
>know about firsthand.
>
>In order to indefinitely integrate, you simply integrate with 0 or 1 as the
>lower limit and the variable of integration as the upper limit. Just like you
>learned in your calculus book.
That's not how I learned to do it. I just learned to do the integral,
and be done, not use some funky limits, convert it to an object, use
some command, DRPN? etc.
>
>And in order to quell any further arguments, while we are on the topic of
>indefinite integration, the TI-89 will integrate more expressions than the
HP48
>with programs.
Sounds like another good reason to use a TI. Integrates more stuff,
sounds good to me.
I need to use a calculator, not wait till a decent one comes along.
So, for me, I'll stick with a TI.
-----------------------------
Remove trousers to reply.
-----------------------------
******************************************************************
* To UNSUBSCRIBE, send an email TO: listserv@lists.ppp.ti.com
* with a message (not the subject) that reads SIGNOFF CALC-TI
*
* Archives at http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/calc-ti.html
******************************************************************
Follow-Ups:
References: