Davide Della Casa

probably trying to factor it. TBC. leaving this open for further checks.

if that's the reason, then yes one expression is much easier to factor than the other see https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=factor%28x%5E%28-6%29%29 vs https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=factor%28x%5E%28-6%29%2B1%29 so that would explain it

in v 1.2.0, the simplification gives: ```1.0*s*(-0.408163-0.102041*i*s*(-19.6*m^2.0*x/(s^2.0)-16.0*m^2.0/(s^2.0))^0.5/m)``` we probably didn't attempt to factor the polynomial as part of simplification in 1.2.1 because attempting the factorisation would have given us the...

acknowledged - however there are some decisions to be made... "point" numbers in Algebrite are really an indication that numerical values are wanted rather than symbolic ones. we'll have to...

some thoughts: - I would probably not change the "power" routines, which (seem to) use the "value with the least value of the argument" definition of "principal root". That's also...

agreed. In the meantime, as a workaround, you can find all the elements in matrix.tensor.elem. It's a bit unwieldy for accessing knowing row/column (and in higher dimensions) but it's a...

quick answer: it's in the symbol table. You can look at the function execution code to see how parameters are passed and how they live in their own scope in...

I think that should work. I'm thinking about a couple of potential complications... - First complication, one assumes that the printout is also parseable, which I think is OK. -...

acknowledged. ...indeed doing ```simplify(factor(x^2-x*y)/factor(x*y-y^2))``` works. I'll see if I can add a simplification step for rational functions like those, where I do try the "factor" trick, I'll see if that...

Just an (unrequested) alternative view that in http://fizzygum.org (at https://github.com/davidedc/Fizzygum , spawned from Morphic.js) I've let the system itself fetch its own source automatically looking at the dependencies (looks at...