Screenshot instructions:
Windows
Mac
Red Hat Linux
Ubuntu
Click URL instructions:
Rightclick on ad, choose "Copy Link", then paste here →
(This may not be possible with some types of ads)
From: velten <kai.velten@hs...>  20140329 14:54:35

Thanks, I'll try that. You are probably right that real_p(e) won't work on complex expressions, and I will probably have to keep my current workaround for complex expression, which is plotting imagpart e.g. using plot3d over the subset of the parameter space where I expect imagpart=0. Kai Original Message From: Barton Willis <willisb@...> To: velten <kai.velten@...>, andre maute <andre.maute@...> Subject: RE: [Maximadiscuss] Can Maxima prove Im(x)=0? Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 12:04:59 +0000 > 1. Can I somehow solve equations with assumptions similar to: > assume(12*Vmax%pi*Lv^3<0); > erg:solve((Lvbv)*%pi/4*bv^2+%pi/12*bv^3=Vmax,bv); Solve does not exclude solutions that do not satisfy the assumptions in the fact database. You could try using sublist on the solutions to find the solution that satisfies certain inequalities. >2. Can Maxima prove imagpart(x)=0, if x is complex, depends on >parameters a,b,c..., and the parameter space is restricted similar to >the cubic example below. I'd say Maxima isn't capable of proving anything. You can certainly define predicates such as real_p(e) := is(equal(imagpart(e),0)) For simple expressions, this function might work, but in general, I'd guess that real_p will not work as well as you would like it to work. Barton 