Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.math.symbolic    |    Symbolic algebra discussion    |    10,432 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 9,346 of 10,432    |
|    clicliclic@freenet.de to oldk1331@gmail.com    |
|    Re: fyi, new build of CAS integration te    |
|    11 Apr 17 18:39:17    |
      oldk1331@gmail.com schrieb:       >       > Here's some comments (not excuses!) on the "failed 14 Timofeev       > problems":       >       > (-2*cos(x)^3*(-1+sin(x))+cos(2*x)*sin(x))/(sin(x)^2*sqrt(-5+sin(x)^2))       >       > This integrand is not real, because of the 'sqrt(-5+sin(x)^2)' part.       > In FriCAS, 'complexIntegrate' can give a result. If replace       > 'sqrt(-5+sin(x)^2)' with 'sqrt(5-sin(x)^2)', then 'integrate' can       > give a result.       >       > (cos(1/2*x)+sin(1/2*x))/(%e^x)^(1/3)       >       > If you simply rewrite it as (cos(1/2*x)+sin(1/2*x))/exp(x/3),       > then FriCAS can solve it.       >       > cos(1/3*x)^3/sqrt(%e^x)       >       > Same as previous one, rewrite it as 'cos(1/3*x)^3/exp(x/2)'.       >       > For other failures, 3 are errors, 8 are timeouts.              I believe it has been mentioned on sci.math symbolic that the radicands       of Timofeev's examples 5.85 (#421), 5.89 - 90 (#425 - #426), 5.98 - 99       (#434 - #435), and 5.109 (#446) are negative for all real x. Timofeev       may have been unaware of this because considerable work is involved in       plotting such integrands on paper with the help of a slide rule. If no       indication can be found in his book that such radicands were introduced       deliberately, I won't object if a consensus emerges to negate these six       in the Timofeev testsuite (briefly noting the what and why in comments),       but neither am I going to push the issue.              It should be noted, however, that among the six integrals involving       imaginary radicals, FriCAS seems to have problems only with 5.90 (#426)       and 5.109 (#446) for some reason. And ultimately, the system should of       course be enabled to handle such integrands anyway.              Your integrands involving algebraic powers of #e^x, which correspond to       Timofeev's examples 8.26 - 27 (#542 - #543) and 8.30 (#546), are written       as printed in his textbook, and so should not be modified for reasons       mentioned recently.              Martin.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca