Leo Butler said: (by the date of Tue, 2 Mar 2010 20:41:57 +0000 (GMT))
> Doesn't this do what you want?
>
> (%o11) [e,N[1],N[2],I,a]
> (%i12) solve(eqs,vars);
yes, it does... now :) I wonder why I couldn't get it right last
week. But now it works great, thanks :)
In fact my set of equations was larger, and dealing with them was
done in those subst(...) that I mentioned. But now it's all solved in
a single line. Looks and works great.
That's how I did it:
transpose(uklad_rownan:[g*M+g*m-N[1]=a*M+a*m,N[2]-g*M=a*M,-(N[2]+N[1])*mi_R-N[2]*r+N[1]*r=e*I,e*r=a,I=(m[krazka]*r^2)/2,V=t[1]*a,l[1]=(t[1]^2*a)/2,V=s[2]/t[2]]);
niewiadome:[N[1],N[2],V,t[1],I,e,a,g];
transpose(rozwiazanie:factor(solve(uklad_rownan,niewiadome))[1]);
factor(expand(solve(rozwiazanie[8],m[krazka])[1]));
I'm using transpose in order to see all solutions nicely listed in
vertical vector (or matrix it is?)
(I'm using polish vocabulary above, but it shouldn't matter for you, now:
uklad_rownan - equations
niewiadome - unknowns
[krazka] - disc ;))
thanks again.
But in fact the OP still didn't get an answer.....
--
Janek Kozicki |