It's possible you can get decent results just by sorting the dot
products before converting to multiplication, like (*
=> *).
I'm more worried about the order in the dot products themselves. You
could sort within the dot products themselves, like => , but you might still run into problems, e.g.,
Thanks for the suggestions.
The noncommutative option is probably too strict since ` !=
` then. Or can I make only some multiplications noncommutative?
> You might need to write a naive factor
Is there any documentation on this?
Cheers,
Nico
On Monday, February 27, 2017 at 9:44:45 PM UTC+1,
Actually, I think you can just convert the symbols to multiplications,
but set them all as commutative=False so that they don't get
rearranged. Then you can apply factor() (which I believe basically
does the above algorithm for noncommutatives), and to convert back to
dot products, convert each mul
The function that does the simplification you want is factor():
In [22]: var('a b c d')
Out[22]: (a, b, c, d)
In [23]: factor(a*c + b*d - a*d - b*c)
Out[23]: (a - b)⋅(c - d)
However, I'm not sure how to apply it here. You can't just convert
your dot products to multiplications because it isn't t
Thanks for the reply.
> I assume e0, e1, and e2 are arbitrary vectors.
Indeed, they can be anything. (I'm looking at 3 dimensions here but given
the fact that everything is a dot product I assume that doesn't play much
of a role.)
Cheers,
Nico
On Monday, February 27, 2017 at 6:37:59 PM UTC
How the expression zeta obtained. Do input the expression you show or is
it obtained by vector algebraic operations on vector expressions. I assume
e0, e1, and e2 are arbitrary vectors.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Nico Schlömer
wrote:
> I have a somewhat large expression in inner product
I have a somewhat large expression in inner products,
```
zeta = (
- * *
+ 4 * * *
+ (
+ *
+ *
+ *
) * (
+ + +
- - -
