New answers tagged

1

Not as elegant as Distribute, but there is also Tuples: Tuples[List /@ list /. {{x__}} :> {x}] {{a, b, c, f, g}, {a, b, c, f, h}, {a, b, d, f, g}, {a, b, d, f, h}} and Outer: Flatten[Outer[List, ## & @@ (List /@ list /. {{x__}} :> {x})], 4] {{a, b, c, f, g}, {a, b, c, f, h}, {a, b, d, f, g}, {a, b, d, f, h}}


7

Distribute[list, List] giving {{a, b, c, f, g}, {a, b, c, f, h}, {a, b, d, f, g}, {a, b, d, f, h}}


6

Mainly just to see how Reduce@Exists[..] stacks up against FindInstance[]. I suspect the heuristics of FindInstance will often beat symbolic reduction, but apparently not in this case. Clear[xg1, Mtot, PL, xg2, mac, xga, stab, xgtot]; xgtot = -(xg1 PL + xg2 Mtot)/(Mtot + PL); stab = (xga - xgtot)/mac; Reduce[ Exists[{xg1, Mtot, PL, xg2, mac, xga}, ...


2

Following MarcoB's comments and QuantumDot's suggestion, a solution could be to simply use FindInstance: FindInstance[(xga - (xg1 PL + xg2 Mtot)/(Mtot + PL))/mac < 0.4 && xg1 > 0.3 && 0.1 < stab < 0.4, {xg1}] =!= {} Thank you very much!



Top 50 recent answers are included