Given N equations in K variables,
can Maxima produce N-J equations in K-J variables?
SOLVE and ELIMINATE seem unable, about to reach for pen and paper.
(%i1) elim ([a = x + y, b = y + z, c = z + x, a = b * c], [a, b, c]);
(%o1) elim([a = y + x, b = z + y, c = z + x, a = b c], [a, b, c])
(%i2) load (to_poly);
(%o2) ~/maxima-5.44.0/share/to_poly_solve/to_poly.lisp
(%i3) elim ([a = x + y, b = y + z, c = z + x, a = b * c], [a, b, c]);
2
(%o3) [[z + (y + x) z + (x - 1) y - x],
[b z - y + b x - x, z + x - c, y + x - a]]
(%i4) solve (first (%o3), x);
2
z + y z - y
(%o4) [x = - ------------]
z + y - 1
Related
newbie Maxima question
I have a transfer function in Maxima
E1 : y = K_i*s/(s^2 + w^2);
I'd like to have the closed-form of the equation affter applying the bilinear transform
E2 : s = (2/Ts*(z-1)/(z+1));
I would like to get the transfer function for z, by substituing s by equation E2. How should I proceed?
Regards
Note that subst can apply one or more substitutions stated as equations. In this case, try subst(E2, E1).
That will probably create a messy result -- you can simplify it somewhat by applying ratsimp to the result.
Here's what I get from that.
(%i2) E1 : y = K_i*s/(s^2 + w^2);
K_i s
(%o2) y = -------
2 2
w + s
(%i3) E2 : s = (2/Ts*(z-1)/(z+1));
2 (z - 1)
(%o3) s = ----------
Ts (z + 1)
(%i4) subst (E2, E1);
2 K_i (z - 1)
(%o4) y = ------------------------------
2
4 (z - 1) 2
Ts (z + 1) (------------ + w )
2 2
Ts (z + 1)
(%i5) ratsimp (%);
2
2 K_i Ts z - 2 K_i Ts
(%o5) y = -----------------------------------------------
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
(Ts w + 4) z + (2 Ts w - 8) z + Ts w + 4
Please consider a C program that, given x, will return y and z such that y + z * 2 = x, for the smallest possible y. Roughly, I could create a nested loop:
for(y = 0; y < x; ++ y){
for(z = 0; z < x; ++z){
if(y + 2 * z == x){
printf("%d + 2 * %d = %d", y, z, x);
}
}
}
How could I translate this kind of nested loop in the functional way? Is it feasible? Is it reasonable or am I just misjudging the approach? My best attempt so far:
let foo x =
let rec aux (y, z, q) =
match (y + z * 2) with
r when r = q -> (y, z)
|_ -> aux(y + 1, z + 1, q) //How to check different values of z
aux(0, 0, x) //for each value of y?
It will not work, since it will just increment both y and z. How can I check different values of z, for every value of y?
You have to add those checks in the match.
See here what your code is missing:
let foo x =
let rec aux (y, z, q) =
match (y + z * 2) with
| r when r = q -> (y, z)
| _ when y = q -> failwith "not found !"
| _ when z = q -> aux (y + 1, 0, q)
| _ -> aux (y, z + 1, q)
aux (0, 0, x)
And here's a different approach, equally functional but without recursion:
let foo2 x =
let s =
{0 .. x} |> Seq.collect (fun y ->
{0 .. x} |> Seq.collect (fun z ->
seq [y, z]))
Seq.find (fun (y, z) -> y + z * 2 = x) s
which in F# can be written using seq expressions:
let foo3 x =
let s = seq {
for y in {0 .. x} do
for z in {0 .. x} do
yield (y, z)}
Seq.find (fun (y, z) -> y + z * 2 = x) s
and it resembles your original C program.
I am very novice in maxima. I want to get the solution for W using these equations:
e1: A*W + B*Y = I$
e2: C*W + D*Y = 0$
linsolve ([e1, e2], [W]);
But linsolve just generates [].
The example in the manual works:
(%i1) e1: x + z = y$
(%i2) e2: 2*a*x - y = 2*a^2$
(%i3) e3: y - 2*z = 2$
(%i4) linsolve ([e1, e2, e3], [x, y, z]);
(%o4) [x = a + 1, y = 2 a, z = a - 1]
That means that the equation cannot be solved for the variables that you requested. You have to solve in respect to both variables:
linsolve([e1,e2],[W,Y]);
D I C I
[W = - ---------, Y = ---------]
B C - A D B C - A D
You can solve for W for each of your equations separately. For example:
linsolve ([e1],[W]);
B Y - I
[W = - -------]
A
I am trying to simplify a differential equation via substitution in maxima. However, the substitution does not seem to be working.
Here's my code:
depends (\rho,[t, r, \theta, z]); depends (V, [t, r, \theta, z]);
f_contin : diff (\rho, t) + diff (\rho*r*V[r], r)*(1/r) = 0;
base : diff (V[b]*r*\rho, r) = 0;
V_sub : V[r] = V[b] + \epsilon*V[r];
subst (V_sub, f_contin);
subst (base, %o6);
The last substitution did not work. What am I doing wrong here?
For clarity I add a Screenshot here:
The problem is that subst(a=b, c) (or equivalently subst(b, a, c)) can only make substitutions when a is an exact subexpression of c.
ratsubst (which see) can handle some cases when a is not an exact subexepression but in this case it doesn't seem to work.
But I think you can get the result you want by just subtracting the one equation from the other. Note that (a=b) - (c=d) yields a - c = b - d. Note also that I've put in another step (in %i7) to apply the diff operator. Also I've multiplied %o7 by r to get something like base.
(%i1) depends (\rho,[t, r, \theta, z]); depends (V, [t, r, \theta, z]);
(%o1) [rho(t, r, theta, z)]
(%o2) [V(t, r, theta, z)]
(%i3) f_contin : diff (\rho, t) + diff (\rho*r*V[r], r)*(1/r) = 0;
drho d
r V ---- + r (-- (V )) rho + V rho
drho r dr dr r r
(%o3) ---- + ------------------------------------ = 0
dt r
(%i4) base : diff (V[b]*r*\rho, r) = 0;
drho d
(%o4) V r ---- + (-- (V )) r rho + V rho = 0
b dr dr b b
(%i5) V_sub : V[r] = V[b] + \epsilon*V[r];
(%o5) V = epsilon V + V
r r b
(%i6) subst (V_sub, f_contin);
drho drho d
(%o6) ---- + (r (epsilon V + V ) ---- + r (-- (epsilon V + V )) rho
dt r b dr dr r b
+ (epsilon V + V ) rho)/r = 0
r b
(%i7) %o6, nouns;
drho drho d d
(%o7) ---- + (r (epsilon V + V ) ---- + r (epsilon (-- (V )) + -- (V )) rho
dt r b dr dr r dr b
+ (epsilon V + V ) rho)/r = 0
r b
(%i8) expand (r*%o7 - base);
drho drho d
(%o8) r ---- + epsilon r V ---- + epsilon r (-- (V )) rho + epsilon V rho = 0
dt r dr dr r r
The function subst (a,b,c) substitutes a for b in c. It uses 3 arguments, your first subst works because its interpreted as subst (V[b] + \epsilon*V[r],V[r], f_contin);
Your second subst is probably interpreted as subst (0,diff (V[b]*r*\rho, r),%) therefor nothing is substituted. What do you want to substitute for what?
I'm having trouble finding out how to do this:
x=a+b
y=c+d
z=x*y
I would like the output to be
z=ac+ad+bc+bd
not
z=xy
Like this?
(%i1) x: a+b;
(%o1) b + a
(%i2) y: c+d;
(%o2) d + c
(%i3) z: x*y;
(%o3) (b + a) (d + c)
(%i4) z: expand (z);
(%o4) b d + a d + b c + a c
(%i5)
Assignment in maxima is done by :, not = (which is used for checking for equality)
Actually, to get the output he's requesting without assigning a lot of variables,
you can just do this:
(%i1) z = x*y, x = a+b, y = c+d, expand;
(%o1) z = b d + a d + b c + a c
This is an old question, but the canonical solution in my opinion is the subst() function