## 216 Reputation

15 years, 227 days

## I still get zero in response...

I still get zero in response to int(P3(x,1),x=0..infinity); while the numeric integration just gives more digits. Drew

## Meijer G...

Incidentally, I get a different Meijer G function: MeijerG([[1, 1], ], [[1, 1/2, 1/2], []], 1) Any ideas? Drew

## Meijer G...

Incidentally, I get a different Meijer G function: MeijerG([[1, 1], ], [[1, 1/2, 1/2], []], 1) Any ideas? Drew

## Yes...

Hello, Yes, that's right. This time, though, I wanted to include the (definite) integrals in the equations rather than their numerical values. The reason for this is that later on I'm going to have to solve a similar system which has integrals which are functions of one of the variables and I wanted to develop a general approach. I thought that this made it different enough to warrant a new thread. Sorry for any confusion, and thanks for your help on both. Andrew

## Yes...

Hello, Yes, that's right. This time, though, I wanted to include the (definite) integrals in the equations rather than their numerical values. The reason for this is that later on I'm going to have to solve a similar system which has integrals which are functions of one of the variables and I wanted to develop a general approach. I thought that this made it different enough to warrant a new thread. Sorry for any confusion, and thanks for your help on both. Andrew

## Thanks...

I've tried to upload the worksheet, but I seem to be having trouble doing that. I'll keep trying and then you'll be able to see it. As for the "one line" comment, I just meant that the line defining deltasolved is written on one line in my worksheet, but it broke into two when I copied and pasted onto this webpage. I thought this might have caused confusion. I suppose the semicolon tells you where the real end of the line is anyway, so it wasn't necessary to point out. I think you're both right about this. I'd come to the same conclusion. The explicit form for g giving delta does exist in closed form and I put that in instead of the solve command and it seems to be working now. Thanks both very much for your help. There are a couple of other questions I have. Firstly, how do I restrict the range of delta plotted? In other words zoom in on a slab with delta between two values (keeping the range for the other variables the same)? The other thing I'm interested in is the wrapper you mentioned. I'd like to have it put alpha=0 anytime there's no solution from the equations. I'll get the file up ASAP. Thanks everybody. Andrew

## Thanks...

I've tried to upload the worksheet, but I seem to be having trouble doing that. I'll keep trying and then you'll be able to see it. As for the "one line" comment, I just meant that the line defining deltasolved is written on one line in my worksheet, but it broke into two when I copied and pasted onto this webpage. I thought this might have caused confusion. I suppose the semicolon tells you where the real end of the line is anyway, so it wasn't necessary to point out. I think you're both right about this. I'd come to the same conclusion. The explicit form for g giving delta does exist in closed form and I put that in instead of the solve command and it seems to be working now. Thanks both very much for your help. There are a couple of other questions I have. Firstly, how do I restrict the range of delta plotted? In other words zoom in on a slab with delta between two values (keeping the range for the other variables the same)? The other thing I'm interested in is the wrapper you mentioned. I'd like to have it put alpha=0 anytime there's no solution from the equations. I'll get the file up ASAP. Thanks everybody. Andrew

## Error...

Hello Paulina, I've tried your suggestion and it doesn't seem to work. I get the error message "invalid subscript selector" after trying to transform the plot. My system looks like this: I have one equation f(alpha,beta,Omega)=0 and I wish to find all the points which satisfy it and then for each point find delta from the know function delta=g(alpha,beta,Omega) and the plots I wish to create are beta(Omega,delta) and alpha(Omega,delta). I used the commands p:=implicitplot3d(f(alpha,beta,Omega)=0,alpha=-1..1,beta=-1..1,Omega=-5..5,grid=[15,15,15],axes=box): and > deltasolved:=(alpha,beta,Omega)->evalf(solve(G(alpha,beta,Omega,delta)=0,delta)); This last line is just because the equation delta=g(alpha,beta,Omega) is originally written in the form G(alpha,beta,delta,Omega)=0. It should all be on one line. plottools[transform]((alpha,beta,Omega)->[alpha,deltasolved(alpha,beta,Omega),Omega])(p); I think I followed your instructions. What am I doing wrong? Andrew

## Error...

Hello Paulina, I've tried your suggestion and it doesn't seem to work. I get the error message "invalid subscript selector" after trying to transform the plot. My system looks like this: I have one equation f(alpha,beta,Omega)=0 and I wish to find all the points which satisfy it and then for each point find delta from the know function delta=g(alpha,beta,Omega) and the plots I wish to create are beta(Omega,delta) and alpha(Omega,delta). I used the commands p:=implicitplot3d(f(alpha,beta,Omega)=0,alpha=-1..1,beta=-1..1,Omega=-5..5,grid=[15,15,15],axes=box): and > deltasolved:=(alpha,beta,Omega)->evalf(solve(G(alpha,beta,Omega,delta)=0,delta)); This last line is just because the equation delta=g(alpha,beta,Omega) is originally written in the form G(alpha,beta,delta,Omega)=0. It should all be on one line. plottools[transform]((alpha,beta,Omega)->[alpha,deltasolved(alpha,beta,Omega),Omega])(p); I think I followed your instructions. What am I doing wrong? Andrew
 Page 1 of 1
﻿