881c6f28-dc7e-40c9-b58a-35b4811d9a8e 22 4 5 false false 0 decimal

&[DATE] &[TIME] - &[FILENAME]

restart MaximaControl Restart complete.

My preffered method

V.0 1200 : R.1 1000 : R.2 2000 : R.3 3000 : R.4 4000 : R.5 5000 : V.A V.0 ≡ V.1 V.A V.B - ≡ V.2 V.B V.C - ≡ V.3 V.B 0 - ≡ V.4 V.C 0 - ≡ V.5 V.A V.C - ≡ I.1 V.1 R.1 / ≡ I.2 V.2 R.2 / ≡ I.3 V.3 R.3 / ≡ I.4 V.4 R.4 / ≡ I.5 V.5 R.5 / ≡ I.0 I.1 I.5 + ≡ I.1 I.2 I.3 + ≡ I.4 I.2 I.5 + ≡ 201 sys I.0 V.B V.C 31 sys Solve no result

V.A 1200 ≡ V.1 V.A V.B - ≡ V.2 V.B V.C - ≡ V.3 V.B 0 - ≡ V.4 V.C 0 - ≡ V.5 V.A V.C - ≡ I.1 V.1 1000 / ≡ I.2 V.2 2000 / ≡ I.3 V.3 3000 / ≡ I.4 V.4 4000 / ≡ I.5 V.5 5000 / ≡ I.0 I.1 I.5 + ≡ I.1 I.2 I.3 + ≡ I.4 I.2 I.5 + ≡ 141 sys I.0 V.B V.C 31 sys Solve no result

Casio doesn't quite do it either

these two attempts are only distinguished by how the resistors values are plugged in. Also how to voltage value is declared

until I take out most but not all of the numeric declarations. That is, I plug the resisitor values in manually. Why it doesn't care about "Vi" being declared numerically is anyones guess...

Look at how clean it is. No brackets with brackets ,within brackets, within brackets or arrows, or words or anything at all spurious...

Mathcad Prime works exclusively in matrix format and variables must be declared outside the matrix. It will not allow non-boolean equals signs in the matrix

Mathcad 15 will not do it either

Casio on the other hand eats it up:

Even having declared what I wanted substituted in external to the square matrix Mathcad Prime demands it still manages to not work inexplicably:

Mathcad Primne doesn't like my variables. It only solves the matrix after I replace my variables with more generic ones

Matlab technically only does square matricies also. At least it doesn't bog down and do nothing like Mathcad Prime... althouth it works it is probably my least favorite method due to the last 7 lines being a reduction in legibilty comparted to Casio.

Maxima appears to only do square matricies as well. Not what I'm looking for. I realize any mathmatical software can probably be made to work with the below method or the one used in Matlab which will likely be my go to method (assigning numerical values before exectuing the simultaneous equation solution). I really like how Casio lets you choose whic return values your interested in...

I downloaded the trial for mathmatica and fumbled through it bewildered with it. It's nearly impossible to format, the colors of letters seem random at times, like the "e" in "eq6" and even if the overdetermined system worked it is just way too much typing. After failing to do what my Casio does I tried to replicate what I did in Maxima, just solve a 20x20 matrix, no such luck however...

specific suggestions for mathematica overdetermined systems:

https://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/6232/how-to-solve-an-overdetermined-system-in-mathematica

A bit beyond my willingness to persue given maxima's unweildyness and all for something casio does easily to some extent...

I did look at Julia overdetermined systems but it got over my head rather fast:

https://www.juliahomotopycontinuation.org/guides/overdetermined-tracking/#overdetermined*systems

Maple doesn't look any more promising either and they don't offer a trial...