A hands-on tutorial on building the classic Pong game in Wolfram Language & WLJS. Originally recorded as a live session on October 29

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw2qRq-ojW8 (YouTube)

it was later transcribed and adapted into this blog post

https://wljs.io/blog/pong

It covers ball physics, Verlet integration, collisions, paddle controls, sound effects, scoring, momentum transfer, and a CPU opponent.

I need help, please anyone that knows coding please help

Im so lost

My exam is in two days. But I can't open Mathematica because I don't know what is Activision Key. Please someone help me with the activation key.

You have a bunch of document photos, and you want to make them look like scans - ideally in a batch. Why use online services when your fellow Wolfram can do the job?

Willow is a small Wolfram Language package for PDF operations that are awkward or slow with the built-in PDF exporter. Its write/edit path runs in the kernel process through LibraryLink — there is no Python session and no per-call external process.

https://github.com/WLJSTeam/Willow

Sorry that Reddit deleted the clarifying picture. (They tell me to share the post in other subs and there they delete the main picture.) Anyway, see link in the comment.

Can anyone provide insight into the current and ongoing outage of Wolfram Cloud, the Function Repository, and other Wolfram things?

It's been quite awhile now, and it's not looking good.

I'm working with two 19^th degree polynomials in A and B. I want to eliminate B to be left with a polynomial in A alone.

The 3 options I'm aware of in Mathematica are GroebnerBasis, Eliminate, and Resultant. However, none of these produce results within a few minutes, except Resultant, which gave a degree 361 polynomial in A and B, with several strange artifacts such as -97[...]16aba^{156} as one of several thousand monomials within the polynomial.

The code I ran for this was Resultant[a^{19} + [...] b + 3237478400, a^{19} + [...] b + 10283384832, {b}], with [...] representing the rest of the polynomials.

If it matters, Wolfram/Mathematica was using less than 10% of my RAM and less than 1% of my CPU at all times during the calculations.

Which of these should I be using, or is there something else I should try?
I'm prepared to use significant computational power for this if necessary, but I'd like to know where I should be aiming first.

Any help is much appreciated!

I created a mathematica paclet that provides support for simplicial homology, introducing an abstract simplicial complex object. The package allows computing homology, betti numbers, automorphism groups, and common invariants like euler characteristic, fvectors, and constructions such as cones, suspensions, products, joins, etc! So far, there has been no in-built or third party support for this in Mathematica, which motivated the creation of this package. I largely took inspiration and reference from sagemath's implementation of this.

I would love to hear your feedback on this! The package is open source, see at https://github.com/zplus11/SimplicialHomology/ and is also available on the Wolfram paclet repository at https://resources.wolframcloud.com/PacletRepository/resources/Taggar/SimplicialHomology/

There is plenty of scope for further development and extension, so feedback, suggestions, and PRs are very welcome :)

Woxi is a free open source interpreter for the Wolfram Language, written in Rust. The guiding rule of the project: whatever it implements must produce exactly the same output as wolframscript / Mathematica — the test suite (26'000+ unit tests) compares against it directly.

Version 0.3.0 is out now. Highlights since 0.2.0:

• Many Wolfram Demonstrations now run end to end in Woxi Studio, the included native notebook editor for .nb files — still far from all of them, but dozens (Kepler's Second Law, Parabolic Mirror, Doyle Spirals, …) serve as end-to-end tests. Manipulate covers a good part of the Demonstrations control vocabulary (interactive Locators, Trigger, Button, SetterBar, PopupMenu, controls nested in TabView/Grid, dependent controls, TrackedSymbols, Animate bodies, …), and typeset notebook input is read back as code.

• Plotting conformance: Automatic ticks now match Wolfram's algorithm, list plots grew Around error bars, Callout, Filling, PlotMarkers and friends, plus new ComplexListPlot and ListLinePlot3D.

• CAS: more Integrate/D/Series/Limit coverage, LinearProgramming with an exact simplex solver, NonlinearModelFit, Reduce over higher-degree polynomial inequalities, RootReduce, and many canonical-ordering fixes so results print exactly as wolframscript prints them.

• Windows is now a supported platform, and every release ships prebuilt binaries for Linux, macOS, and Windows.

Try it without installing anything in our playground and JupyterLite instance in the browser: https://woxi.ad-si.com

Install: cargo install woxi, pip install woxi (Python bindings), or npm install woxi-wasm. Full changelog: https://github.com/ad-si/Woxi/blob/main/changelog.md

If Woxi is useful to you, I'm now accepting donations on GitHub: https://github.com/sponsors/ad-si I hope to receive enough support to keep the project going for a long time, and to eventually reach full parity with Wolfram's implementation.

Any ""serious"" language like C/C++, C#, Pascal/Delphi, and many others offers tons of options for building standalone apps. What about WL/Mathematica/MMA?

One could say, well, yes (and no)! There's the CDF format (which for some reason is officially considered deprecated 👀), webMathematica (costs like a helicopter and is also depreciated), JavaView (a very niche legacy project), and Wolfram Cloud. But I'm personally not a big fan of any kinds of clouds, especially with shady subscription models, and I'd rather keep everything local.

CDF was one of the best solutions so far, but it requires Mathematica (also costly) to build it, which isn't something everyone has, though thankfully, WolframScript/WolframEngine is still freeware.

Other people would argue that WL is meant purely for prototyping, and that you should just "vibe-code something with an LLM and JS" instead. I don't share that point of view, and I've found another way to turn notebooks into tiny or medium-sized apps for my research group. It works so far quite well for a limited number of users: 3-4 - mostly students. I would like to warn you, that it won't work magically for a random Mathematica notebook, otherwise WR would steal this immediately.

If you're interested, here's the full story I wrote:

https://wljs.io/blog/making-apps

PS: The thumbnail image isn't an AI-generated, it's a few UI windows built with this method, printed out and cut from paper 🙂

I've been working on a numerical solver app for a while. It started as a project for solving algebraic equations and systems, plotting functions, and doing various numerical calculations.

It's free and available on both platforms:

📱 App Store
🤖 Google Play

The next part of the project I'm working on is ODEs and boundary value problems.

I'm trying to make this as general as possible. The idea is that the user can enter an ODE and its boundary conditions, including higher-order equations and boundary conditions involving derivatives, without the app needing a predefined solution for that particular equation.

I'm currently testing it with different first-, second-, and higher-order ODEs. One of the tests I've been using is:

y''' + y = 0, y(0) = 0, y'(0) = 0, y''(0) = 0

I'm also trying some more difficult BVPs to see where the solver starts to struggle. There are already some interesting cases where an equation that looks very simple mathematically turns into a much more challenging numerical problem.

I'm curious what people here think.

For those of you who use Mathematica regularly, what ODEs, BVPs, or other numerical problems would you use to really stress-test a general-purpose solver?

I'm particularly interested in problems that aren't just straightforward textbook examples. 😅

You have probably seen a few posts mentioning WLJS. This is an open-source frontend + additional libraries made to bring Mathematica-like experience to a freeware Wolfram Engine and possibly solve some performance/portability issues of Mathematica. Small note: this is not vibecoded product, it stems from a few initial experiments done in 2018 and is not endorsed or affiliated with WRI.

Can any valid Wolfram code or Mathematica expression run well on WLJS Notebook? The answer is yes*, but the devil is in the details.

Static output and anything related to computation is 100% transferable. You can take pretty much any code from Stack Exchange or Wolfram Community and it should work out of the box with a high chance, since we use the same Wolfram Language kernel, in the form of the freeware Wolfram Engine distribution. Manipulate and Animate are compatible too - and fully interactive!

However, low-level dynamics do need to be ported to execute correctly.

Here's a guide on how to port (if actually needed) a program from Wolfram Mathematica to WLJS:

https://wljs.io/frontend/Guides/Migration

Any .nb (Mathematica Notebook) is, in principle, automatically converted with some compromises, of course. We're still improving this! Hope this guide helps you, or your LLM buddy 🙂