Skip to main content

plotting - Why does the replace all (/.) evaluate differently in plot


I'm plotting this function:


Plot[(2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2 /. {f -> (f 10^9), 

l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8}), {f, 17.5, 26.5}]

but it does not plot correctly unless I do this:


Plot[Evaluate[(2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2 /. {f -> (f 10^9), 
l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8})], {f, 17.5, 26.5}]

Why is the replace all command being evaluated differently in the two cases?



Answer



This is strongly related to Plot draws list of curves in same color when not using Evaluate but the specific issue there has to do with styling of lines rather than evaluation itself.


In this case the question is why the curve scale ends up different. For that you need to understand how Plot works. It is akin to Block over the plot variables. Now consider:



Block[{f = 3},
(2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2 /. {f -> (f 10^9), l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8})
]

Block[{f = 3},
Evaluate[(2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2 /. {f -> (f 10^9), l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8})]
]


1.94818*10^-18


1.94818

Clearly the replacement rule is not having the same effect in both cases. Critically ReplaceAll does not hold its arguments therefore standard evaluation order is followed which means that we get something like this:


Block[{f = 3},
foo[2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2, {f -> (f 10^9), l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8}]
]


foo[(18 l^2 π^4)/c^2, {3 -> 3000000000, l -> 0.01, c -> 300000000}]


(foo stands in as an arbitrary head with standard evaluation.) Note that the replacement rule is now 3 -> 3000000000 and that 3 does not appear in the left-hand side. We would need ReplaceAll to also hold its arguments to prevent this; it can be simulated using Unevaluated:


Block[{f = 3},
Unevaluated[2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2] /.
Unevaluated[{f -> (f 10^9), l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8}]
]


1.94818


Evaluate works in your example because it causes a symbolic evaluation outside the scope of Plot. However for the same reason if f has a global value it will again fail. It is more robust to use Unevaluated as shown above but this is rather inconvenient. There is another robust though undocumented method: the Plot option Evaluated -> True. This causes an evaluation of the plot function before a value is substituted but after the variable is scoped by Plot:


f = 1.23;

Plot[(2 (l/2 π)^2 ((2 π f)/c)^2 /. {f -> (f 10^9), l -> .01, c -> 3 10^8}),
{f, 17.5, 26.5}, Evaluated -> True]

enter image description here


This option won't scope the other two replacement symbols l and c of course but it is still my preferred approach for such problems. Also look at HoldPattern which can be of some utility.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....