[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: Re: Simplify with NestedLessLess?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg106624] Re: [mg106531] Re: [mg106487] Simplify with NestedLessLess?
• From: Dave Bird <dbird at ieee.org>
• Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 05:12:49 -0500 (EST)
• References: <201001141049.FAA19892@smc.vnet.net> <4B4F39E7.1070002@wolfram.com> <4B4FAC81.7000108@ieee.org> <4B4FB26F.7050702@wolfram.com> <201001150821.DAA29881@smc.vnet.net> <op.u6k8eysrtgfoz2@bobbys-imac.local> <4B5215AE.6020402@ieee.org> <op.u6niq5nhtgfoz2@bobbys-imac.local> <4B527F72.9010000@ieee.org> <op.u6nuvknatgfoz2@bobbys-imac.local> <op.u6nvhla9tgfoz2@bobbys-imac.local> <4B53A4B6.5010507@ieee.org> <op.u6pmhgrmtgfoz2@bobbys-imac.local>
• Reply-to: dbird at ieee.org

I completely agree with you here. This has been an eye-opener for me. 
Such an ordinarily trivial operation done so often, both in engineering 
and physics, is anything but trivial in it's implications...

Dave

DrMajorBob wrote:
> for some value of the word "work". (I don't think you've defined, 
> precisely, what you're looking for.)
>
> <snip>
>
>> This works for the test expression, obviously. But, can it be made to 
>> work for a more complex expression containing say a radical?
>>
>

• References:
  • Simplify with NestedLessLess?
    • From: dbird <dbird@ieee.org>
  • Re: Simplify with NestedLessLess?
    • From: Dave Bird <dbird@ieee.org>