MathGroup Archive 1995

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

Search the Archive

About Simplify

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg2355] About Simplify
  • From: Jesus ROJO <jesroj at>
  • Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 01:49:31 -0400

Your message:
> Jesus:
> Group rules do not allow comparisons of systems like Maple vs.
> Mathematica.  Please remove the Maple paragraph below and I
> will post your message.
> Thank you.
> Moderator

 When you work with Mathematica in a non-trivial
 way, you frecuently use the function Simplify.
 But this function has a important problem.
 If Simplify finishes its work, the result is
 fine. If it doesn't finish, it paralyses the
 computer and the 'trace' of work shows that
 the computer doesn't work. The problem
 comes generally with very long variables
 (or expressions), which are the most interesting
 to simplify.
 Other symbolic manipulators solve better this
 problem; let be 'XXX' one of this. When I have
 a variable that I cannot simplify with Mathematica,
 then the XXX manipulator makes the simplification
 in a reasonable time (e.g. 10 or 15 minutes for
 a 100K variable).
 My question is double. First: is there another
 Simplify that I don't know ?  Second: do there
 exist some previous operations that improve the
 work of Simplify ?
 In any circumstance I think that it is necessary
 that 'Mathematica' has in the future a better function
 than the actual one.
 I send also this message to technical support of
 Mathematica in the hope of getting any answer for
 my problem.
 			    Jesus ROJO
 |  Jesus ROJO                         |
 |  Dpto. de Matematica Aplicada       |
 |  E.T.S. de Ingenieros Industriales  |
 |  Paseo del Cauce s/n                |
 |  47011 VALLADOLID, Spain            |
 |  Phone : 34 - 83 - 42 33 90         |
 |  Fax   : 34 - 83 - 42 34 06         |
 |  e-mail: jesroj at   |

  • Prev by Date: Re: 3D Plot
  • Next by Date: Re: There must be a better way!
  • Previous by thread: A few answers
  • Next by thread: Newbie Q: - how do I add search paths correctly...