On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Daniel Dalton wrote:
> It works, thank you. Any reason why sqrt(2)*sqrt(3) isn't simplified?
There's a function called rootscontract which, according to the
manual, "converts products of roots into roots of products". So you
could try doing rootscontract(%); at the end of the calculation.
> Also, can I use radcan () as a replacement for ratsimp or is it still
> best to use ratsimp when you aren't dealing with exponents and logs?
radcan() and ratsimp() are two different ways of simplifying an
expression. For the problem you stated, I think it's fair to say that
radcan() produces an objectively more useful result. For some other
problems, ratsimp() produces an objectively more useful result, and
for still other problems, it's a matter of personal taste. My usual
strategy is to try one, and if I find the form it outputs
inconvenient, then try the other. The same goes for other
simplification functions, such as expand(), factor(), partfrac(),
trigsimp(), trigexpand(), trigreduce(), etc..
radcan() usually tends to consume more CPU time than ratsimp().
(Others are more qualified than me to explain the technical
differences between the radcan() and ratsimp() functions.)
> Again should the to_poly_solve function be used instead of solve? Or is
> it only useful in some cases?
The advantage of to_poly_solve() is that it can handle a wider range
of problems than plain solve(). The disadvantages are that
to_poly_solve() involves spending time loading an external package,
and that, in the first paragraph of the documentation of the
to_poly_solve package, the author reserves the right that "the
specifications of the functions in these packages might change", so if
you write a batch script using to_poly_solve() that works fine now, it
might stop working in future versions of Maxima.
--
HTH,
Dan