I would agree generically with the positive part of your stated desirable goal. Better simplification methods for expressions is very needed functionality. I do prefer though, controled simplication to automatic simplification, as no algorithm can always predict  what the user wants.

In the mean time, it is better to avoid syntactical based methods (like using op) , and use instead something more "mathematically" (or semantically) oriented.

There are already some commands to avoid relying just on inspection for identifying "relevant pieces" in the expression:

`simplify/radical/indets`(expr);
                                 (1/3)
                               {g     }

`simplify/getkernels`(expr,false);

                  1      (1/3)   (2/3)    (1/3)     5
               {------, g     , g     , (g      + 1) }
                 (2/3)
                g

I would agree generically with the positive part of your stated desirable goal. Better simplification methods for expressions is very needed functionality. I do prefer though, controled simplication to automatic simplification, as no algorithm can always predict  what the user wants.

In the mean time, it is better to avoid syntactical based methods (like using op) , and use instead something more "mathematically" (or semantically) oriented.

There are already some commands to avoid relying just on inspection for identifying "relevant pieces" in the expression:

`simplify/radical/indets`(expr);
                                 (1/3)
                               {g     }

`simplify/getkernels`(expr,false);

                  1      (1/3)   (2/3)    (1/3)     5
               {------, g     , g     , (g      + 1) }
                 (2/3)
                g

You may do instead:

expr:=-(1/12)*(-g*vb-g+z*g-g^(2/3)*z+g^(2/3)*vb)*(g^(1/3)+1)^5/g^(2/3):

(simplify@eval)(expr,g=u^3) assuming positive:
subs(u=g^(1/3),%);
          (1/3)       (1/3)      (1/3)             (1/3)     5
        (g      vb + g      - z g      + z - vb) (g      + 1)
        ------------------------------------------------------
                                  12

You may do instead:

expr:=-(1/12)*(-g*vb-g+z*g-g^(2/3)*z+g^(2/3)*vb)*(g^(1/3)+1)^5/g^(2/3):

(simplify@eval)(expr,g=u^3) assuming positive:
subs(u=g^(1/3),%);
          (1/3)       (1/3)      (1/3)             (1/3)     5
        (g      vb + g      - z g      + z - vb) (g      + 1)
        ------------------------------------------------------
                                  12

Why don't you post your input in text form or uploat your worksheet? It would be easier for answering your question.

You just use the name as the third argument:

convert(293.15*Unit(K),temperature,degC);
                          20.0000000 [degC]

You just use the name as the third argument:

convert(293.15*Unit(K),temperature,degC);
                          20.0000000 [degC]

Find in the header of your post, the links "edit" and "flag this".

Find in the header of your post, the links "edit" and "flag this".

You should be able to edit your post as long as it was not replied. You could flag your own post, telling the system manager to remove it.

You should be able to edit your post as long as it was not replied. You could flag your own post, telling the system manager to remove it.

Note, from ?argument :

The argument function returns the principal value of the argument of the complex-valued expression x. This means that argument(x) = t specifies x = polar(abs(x), t) = abs(x) * exp(I*t) where -Pi < t <= Pi.
 

Note, from ?argument :

The argument function returns the principal value of the argument of the complex-valued expression x. This means that argument(x) = t specifies x = polar(abs(x), t) = abs(x) * exp(I*t) where -Pi < t <= Pi.
 

You may write all the temperatures in Kelvin, i.e. 293K para la crema, and so on...

You may write all the temperatures in Kelvin, i.e. 293K para la crema, and so on...