I'm using sage 7.1 and this code here returns false.
M = matrix ([[sqrt(1-1/2),1/2],[1,-sqrt(1-1/2)]])
N = matrix ([[sqrt(1-1/3),1],[1/3,-sqrt(1-1/3)]])
(M*N).inverse() == N.inverse()*M.inverse()What is going on?
If E denotes the difference;
sage: E = (M*N).inverse() - N.inverse()*M.inverse()
sage: E
[-sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 6/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) - 6*(3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/((6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1)^2*(sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + (3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) + 1)) - 1 -1/2*sqrt(2/3) + sqrt(1/2) + 3*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/((6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1)*(sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + (3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) + 1))]
[ sqrt(2/3) - 1/3*sqrt(1/2) - 2*(3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))/((6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1)*(sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + (3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) + 1)) -sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1/(sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + (3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) + 1) - 1/6]You get a matrix whose entries are symbolic expressions. If we write:
sage: E == 0
FalseWe get false because the entries of E are not all zero, as symbolic expressions, but they are actually zero if we simplify all entries one by one:
sage: E[0][0]
-sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 6/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) - 6*(3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/((6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1)^2*(sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + (3*sqrt(2/3) - sqrt(1/2))*(sqrt(2/3) - 2*sqrt(1/2))/(6*sqrt(2/3)*sqrt(1/2) + 1) + 1)) - 1
sage: E[0][0].full_simplify()
0
sage: E[0][1].full_simplify()
0
sage: E[1][1].full_simplify()
0
sage: E[1][0].full_simplify()
0Note that checking whether a symbolic expression is equal to zero is undecidable in general (though we should admit that in the present case, this is just because symbolics is weak in Sage).
Since your symbolic expressions represent algebraic numbers, you can change the ring over which E is defined to be the field of algebraic numbers. In this field, the equalty is decidable, and Sage knows how to handle it well:
sage: E.change_ring(QQbar) == 0
TrueNot that one can also simplify the matrix E directly:
sage: E.simplify_full()
[0 0]
[0 0]In terms of weakness of symbolics in Sage, is there a reason for not trying to apply simplify_full when one tests an expression for zero? (Note that I am very much illiterate regarding Sage's symbolics!)
Damn, i was looking for full_simplify() but tab completion did not gave anything !
OK thanks. I did actually try simplify on the difference, but not simplify_full()
... and by the way, Mathematica just does it.
As a general rule, when you are doing purely algebraic computation, an advice is to tell Sage that you're doing algebra, and not deal with symbolics. Here, you can do:
sage: M = matrix (QQbar,[[sqrt(1-1/2),1/2],[1,-sqrt(1-1/2)]])
sage: N = matrix (QQbar,[[sqrt(1-1/3),1],[1/3,-sqrt(1-1/3)]])
sage: (M*N).inverse() == N.inverse()*M.inverse()
TrueAnd another solution is not to work on QQbar but staying in the symbolic world and using the much more powerful method is_zero:
sage: M = matrix ([[sqrt(1-1/2),1/2],[1,-sqrt(1-1/2)]])
sage: N = matrix ([[sqrt(1-1/3),1],[1/3,-sqrt(1-1/3)]])
sage: ((M*N).inverse() - N.inverse()*M.inverse()).is_zero()
TrueAsked: 8 years ago
Seen: 811 times
Last updated: Apr 18 '16
Copyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.