Skip to main content

simplifying expressions - Why doesn't Mathematica make an obvious simplification?


I am doing some calculation with summation and the Kronecker symbol. Here are my steps :


$Assumptions = 
k1 ∈ Reals && k2 ∈ Reals && k3 ∈ Reals && p1 ∈ Reals && p2 ∈ Reals && p3 ∈ Reals
k = {k1, k2, k3};
p = {p1, p2, p3};
d[i_, j_] := KroneckerDelta[i, j]
proj[i_, j_, k1_, k2_, k3_] :=
d[i, j] -
(d[i, 1]*k1 + d[i, 2]*k2 + d[i, 3]*k3)*

(d[j, 1]*k1 + d[j, 2]*k2 + d[j, 3]*k3)/
(k1^2 + k2^2 + k3^2)
test1 = proj[i, j, k1, k2, k3]*proj[i, j, p1, p2, p3];
test2 = Sum[Sum[test1, {i, 1, 3}], {j, 1, 3}]
test2 // Expand

To explain the steps:


1) I define k and p with real components.
2) I define a projector Pij(k)=δijkikjk2.
3) I compute a summation on the repeated subscript.



After the last step, I have a relatively big expression, the product of k and p components. It looks like 3aa+b+cba+b+cca+b+c+......

The a, b and c stands for k1, k2 and k3 (or p1, 2, 3).


Now the question: why doesn't Mathematica make the simplification because, as anyone can see, the preceding expression can be simplified to 2+......


Is the problem linked to the Expand operation? How can I make the simplification I want?. I thought of using /. to do it, but that doesn't work either.


I hope someone will understand my question!



Answer



You have to explicitly tell Mathematica to simplify expressions. You can do this using Simplify or FullSimplify


Simplify@test2

(2 k2 k3 p2 p3 + 2 k1 p1 (k2 p2 + k3 p3) +
k1^2 (2 p1^2 + p2^2 + p3^2) + k2^2 (p1^2 + 2 p2^2 + p3^2) +

k3^2 (p1^2 + p2^2 + 2 p3^2))/((k1^2 + k2^2 + k3^2) (p1^2 + p2^2 +
p3^2))

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...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...