Mathematica Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Mathematica. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Mathematica doesn't want to solve my exact system with 3 equations and 3 variables.

AdjustPar20[x_] := a x^b Exp[c x]
Solve[AdjustPar20[0.05] == 9.37126 && AdjustPar20'[0.05] == 0 && 
  AdjustPar20[0] == 0, {a, b, c}]

As an explanations why this cannot be solved the program replies:

Solve::ifun: Inverse functions are being used by Solve, so some solutions may not be found; 
             use Reduce for complete solution information. >>

Any ideas?

share|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Solve[] works much better with exact arithmetic:

AdjustPar20[x_] := a x^b Exp[c x]
p = 937126/100000;
sol = Solve[
           AdjustPar20[5/100] == p && 
           ((D[AdjustPar20[t], t] == 0) /. t -> 5/100) &&
           AdjustPar20[0] == 0, {a, b, c}, Reals]

ParametricPlot3D[{a, b, c} /. sol, {a, p, 10 p},
                 PlotRange -> {Automatic, {-1, 1}, Automatic}, 
                 AxesLabel -> {a, b, c}, BoxRatios -> 1]

enter image description here

Please note that AdjustPar20[0] == 0 isn't adding any information since your selected function form already ensures it

share|improve this answer
Note that AdjustPar20[0] == 0 isn't adding information since your selected function form already ensures it. – Dr. belisarius Apr 29 '13 at 12:46
How does one know to solve with these circumstances (rational numbers, real domain)? – BoLe Apr 29 '13 at 12:51
@BoLe, in general, inexact numbers and Solve[] don't mix too well... – J. M. Apr 29 '13 at 12:57
@ belisarius thanks for you suggestion, but my version of Mathematica, 8, cannot solve this. Solve::ivar: 298.48501198004965` is not a valid variable. >> Solve[2.687648609756841*10^-437 a == 9.37126 && 1.007466030596621*10^-433 a == 0 && 3.211110349737091*10^-722 a == 0.01, {a, 298.485, -2221.2}, Reals] Do you think I should define one more equation(instead of the 3rd one), in order to get one exact value of a? – energyMax Apr 29 '13 at 13:08
@Gasper Yes, you need one more equation. But we can't help with that since the equation should represent your problem conditions ... and we ignore them- – Dr. belisarius Apr 29 '13 at 13:19

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.