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 $\frac{\pi}{2}$). 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

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}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....