>>>>> "willisb" == willisb <willisb@unk.edu> writes:
willisb> Commercial Macsyma was a bit chaotic with names for the
willisb> Bessel functions; for bessel(a,b), the second argument is
willisb> the order and for bessel_j(a,b) the first argument is the order.
willisb> One could also use a subscript for the order: bessel_j[a](x).
willisb> (Maybe some versions are different; this is the way my
willisb> macsyma seems to behave.) The display function always showed
willisb> the order as a subscript.
So, both bessel_j(a,x) and bessel_j[a](x) are recognized and produce
the same results?
Given your response and Richard Fateman's, I think bessel_j[a](x) is
the one we should use. (I am ignoring the case issue.)
I'll have to think a bit about how bessel_j[a](x) is internally
represented, before I try this out.
Using this syntax, can I take the derivative wrt to a still? This is
a well-defined operation.
However, I need to get the numerical algorithms in place first....
Ray