Skip to main content

equation solving - Solve[Tan[theta] == (b*Sin[t])/(a*Cos[t]), theta] breaks when "Reals" is added?


Mathematica solves this equation fine:


Solve[ Tan[theta] == (b*Sin[t])/(a*Cos[t]), theta] // InputForm          


{{theta -> ConditionalExpression[ArcTan[(b*Tan[t])/a] + Pi*C[1], 
Element[C[1], Integers]]}}


The solution is real when a, b, and t are real (and t isn't a multiple of π2). However, adding the Reals condition breaks things:


Solve[ Tan[theta] == (b*Sin[t])/(a*Cos[t]), theta, Reals] // InputForm   


Solve::nsmet: This system cannot be solved with the methods available to Solve.

Solve[Tan[theta] == (b*Tan[t])/a, theta, Reals]

Why?




Answer



The issue we encounter here is an apparent incompleteness of the recent updates in the system, we should remember that Solve has been updated in the recent versions of Mathematica and although documentation pages say "last modified in 8", one can distinguish various different issues between ver.8 and ver.9, it's just a state of art. In ver. 8 we get:


Solve[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]), θ]


Solve::ifun: Inverse functions are being used by Solve, so 
some solutions may not be found; use Reduce for complete solution information. >>

{{θ -> ArcTan[(b Tan[t])/a]}}


while in ver. 9


Solve[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]), θ]


{{θ -> ConditionalExpression[ArcTan[(b Tan[t])/a] + π C[1], C[1] ∈ Integers]}}

even though ConditionalExpression was added in ver.8.


There are more substantial issues, but the one above shows that we shouldn't expect behind the scenes a simple procedure yielding always predictable results.


By default underlying variables are assumed to be complex (if there are no algebraic inequalities) and then Solve returns a generic solution, thus it isn't as fine as one seems to believe. When we restrict the domain to Reals a bug may appear, see e.g. Issue with NSolve thus effectively domain specification may be regarded as an application of a different algorithm for searching the solution space. Specifying the domain one can exploit an option Method in Solve which by default is Automatic, see Options[ Solve, Method].


Whenever attempting to solve a transcendental equation involving a few symbolic variables (parameters) it is recommended using Reduce or at least Solve with the MaxExtraConditions option to get more information on the solution space, however the latter cannot always guarantee fully equivalent solution (one can find here a remarkable example), thus encountering more symbolic variables we would rather exploit Reduce.



Sometimes even apparently simple equations can be hard to solve symbolically, for more detailed discussion see What is the difference between Reduce and Solve?.
Here we use Solve in Reals:


θ /. Solve[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]), θ, Reals, Method -> Reduce]


{ConditionalExpression[ 
2 ArcTan[( Cot[t] (-a - b Tan[t] Sqrt[( Cot[t]^2 (a^2 + b^2 Tan[t]^2))/b^2]))/b]
+ 2 π C[1], (C[1] ∈ Integers && b > 0 && Tan[t] > 0) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && b > 0 && Tan[t] < 0) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && b < 0 && Tan[t] > 0) ||

(C[1] ∈ Integers && b < 0 && Tan[t] < 0)],
ConditionalExpression[
2 ArcTan[( Cot[t] (-a + b Tan[t] Sqrt[(Cot[t]^2 (a^2 + b^2 Tan[t]^2))/b^2]))/b]
+ 2 π C[1], (C[1] ∈ Integers && b > 0 && Tan[t] > 0) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && b > 0 && Tan[t] < 0) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && b < 0 && Tan[t] > 0) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && b < 0 && Tan[t] < 0)]}

slightly more detailed information would be found with:


Solve[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]), θ, Reals, Method -> Reduce, 

MaxExtraConditions -> All]

or


Reduce[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]), θ, Reals]

Alternatively we should assume that all variables are real by suplementing the equation with a > 0 && b > 0 && t > 0 && θ > 0 without explicit domain specification:


θ /. Solve[ Tan[θ] == b Sin[t]/(a Cos[t]) && 
a > 0 && b > 0 && t > 0 && θ > 0, θ]



{ConditionalExpression[ ArcTan[(b Tan[t])/a], 
(a > 0 && b > 0 && 0 < t < π/2) ||
(C[1] ∈ Integers && C[1] >= 1 && a > 0 && b > 0 && π C[1] < t < 1/2 (π + 2 π C[1]))]},

ConditionalExpression[ ArcTan[(b Tan[t])/a] + π C[2],
((C[1] | C[2]) ∈ Integers && 0 < t < π/2 && C[2] >= 1 && a > 0 && b > 0) ||
((C[1] | C[2]) ∈ Integers && 1/2 (-π + 4 π C[1]) < t < 1/2 (π + 4 π C[1])
&& C[1] >= 1 && C[2] >= 1 && a > 0 && b > 0) ||
((C[1] | C[2]) ∈ Integers && 1/2 (π + 4 π C[1]) < t < 1/2 (3 π + 4 π C[1])
&& C[1] >= 0 && C[2] >= 1 && a > 0 && b > 0)]}}


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]