you are right Zathras ,there was a typo in my second equation. Actually as you stated, all my equations are the same, it s just the numbers that change. It is normal that the divisor is so big. the data is fine. couldI ask you what result it gave you when you did it (if you solved it)? and what is done by hand or by using the solver?
as I said, it gives me consistent results but with negative exponent which I don t want.
p.s. As for the other sets, it becomes worse when I take them. These 3 unkowns, 3 equations is supposed to be the easiest and most consistent right!
All I did was plug your values back in the original equations and got these answers:
[tt]
449.1564802
218.5372175
113.1959846
[/tt]
which correspond reasonably close to your original 449, 218 and 113.
This is starting to get a little tiresome. As Walter so eloquently put it, with three equations and three unknowns you get either one solution or (@#!).
If you know that the exponents must not be negative then either one or more of the other constants are wrong, or the relationship expressed by the equations is wrong. Only you can determine which is the case.
You are right Zathras, this is becoming complicated, we will rather stop here and I ll try to manage with what I already have.. I thank you guys a lottt for your help. I am sorry if I bothered you. Please accept my apologizes and thank you again for your help and patience!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.