Re: beginner’s question with Maxi ma

> Maybe the problem is that you declare
>
>    declare("-", alphabetic)$
> 
> But then later write -n, which now denotes the symbol named "-n" rather than the negation of n.

Thank you for your reply; I hadn’t considered that side effect. I tried changing “-n” to “-(n)” and “-1” to “-(1)” in the definition of S[], which allowed n to be resolved, but j through m remain unresolved:

   (%i1) S[semi-major_axis, third_flattening, 45°, 0];       
   (%o1) (6.36740874757294245b6 ` m)
                                                     2 j
    │8.39610193191852277b-4                         │
    │────────────────────── + 1.67922038638370455b-3│
    │          k                                    │
    ((2 j sin(1.57079632679489662b0 l)
                                                              m
        1.67922038638370455b-3                           (- 1)  l
    ((- ─────────────────────── - 1.67922038638370455b-3)      ) )/l
               m       m
        2 (- 1)  floor(─) + 2 j
                       2
    + 7.8539816339744831b-1)
   (%i2) _

Do you see anything else in the definition of S[] that might influence j through m not being resolved?


_______________________________________________
Maxima-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss