>> For constants, in isolation, the position I take is that
>> a particular item like (-1)^(1/6) is a six-tuple. Unless you know
>> more info about it.
>
> Ok, Let's assume (-1)^(1/6) is a six-tuple. Here is just
> one of the ways in which this makes solve's answer wrong.
I think that you an Richard might be talking slightly at cross-purposes
here. It's definitely true that solve() is less than brilliant when it's
given radicals like what you're describing. I don't think anyone would
dispute that its results are unhelpful.
I think that Richard is trying to show the problems that we might run
into trying to make a solve implementation that's more helpful. I'm
certain we can/should do better than we do currently, but I suppose it's
important to specify exactly what problem we're trying to solve.
Yes, I agree that at some point we need to bite the bullet and "fix
it". I think the problem is that it's a big and difficult job and
no-one's quite sure how to do that correctly.
Rupert
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20131002/d631069a/attachment.pgp>;