Timeline for How do I improve simplification in Wolfram Engine for expressions with poles and cancellable square roots?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 hours ago | vote | accept | Lawton | ||
| 16 hours ago | comment | added | Lawton | @azerbajdzan I was waiting to accept an answer in case anyone would propose alternate methods that turn out to be simpler / more flexible / otherwise more popular/better, since I know I don't know enough about Wolfram Language to be certain any answer is optimal on my own. | |
| 21 hours ago | comment | added | azerbajdzan | @Lawton If you think some answer works for your question you may consider to accept it. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Lawton | @azerbajdzan How do you mean? Your existing answer to this question worked for all three of the center-point's coordinate-expressions. What do you want to add? | |
| yesterday | comment | added | azerbajdzan | @Lawton I got nice solution for your updated question. Maybe it is better to remove your update from here and move it to another question? | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Lawton | @azerbajdzan I added an explanation of the source of the example expression to my question. | |
| yesterday | history | edited | Lawton | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added background on where the example expression came from.
|
| yesterday | comment | added | azerbajdzan | @Lawton So maybe you should have written it in OP as there may be easier way to simplify it if we know where the problem came from. | |
| yesterday | history | edited | Lawton | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 74 characters in body
|
| yesterday | comment | added | Lawton | @azerbajdzan I promise I absolutely was not trying to set up a simplification failure. The example expression came directly from a personal project where I am attempting to find the coordinates of the center-point of a circle in 3D space by following this post. | |
| 2 days ago | history | became hot network question | |||
| 2 days ago | answer | added | azerbajdzan | timeline score: 11 | |
| 2 days ago | comment | added | b3m2a1 |
I've used Mathematica do get compact expressions for some very nasty tensor calculus, but the trick there was to not take immediate advantage of the simplification engine, in fact I barely used it at all. Instead I allowed Mathematica to manipulate compound expressions, e.g. I could multiply A**F where A and F stood in for some more complicated expression, and then I supplied some general simplification rules for my specific tensors, and only after the main classes of simplifications were handled did I expand things back out to simplify. This is, generally, a hard problem for any CAS
|
|
| 2 days ago | comment | added | azerbajdzan | It is like mixing tea and milk together and then demanding to separate them. The former is easy the latter is hard, if not impossible. | |
| 2 days ago | comment | added | azerbajdzan | It does not seem to be true saying: "I've now encountered expressions that aren't being meaningfully simplified" like if you encountered it by a chance. Rather it seems that the expression was constructed artificially for the purpose so that Mathematica fails at simplifying it. It is easy to construct such expressions. Start with simple expression then manipulate it so that it becomes convoluted but still numerically same as the original. You end up with a complicated expression that is hard to simplify to the original form if you do not know the steps that were made to make it complicated. | |
| 2 days ago | history | asked | Lawton | CC BY-SA 4.0 |