10:08:06	 From  christopher : Does it give the function in closed form or is it internally something crazy?
10:08:21	 From  christopher : Does it have to use the solver for every evaluation?
10:10:03	 From  christopher : Yep!
10:10:04	 From  christopher : thanks
10:13:13	 From  Spencer Dellenbaugh : Is there any equivalent to clicking "next" in Forge if you wanted to see other values?
10:13:53	 From  Justin Sanders : Dees it try and find the smallest solutions for the variables? It seems surprising we got 0 and 1 rather than 3947 and 2384884724
10:18:21	 From  christopher : Maybe it does some Babylonian method type thing
10:21:22	 From  Spencer Dellenbaugh : forall x?
10:23:55	 From  Max Heller : Why is xi in a list in the forall? Is it so you could quantify over more things?
10:27:35	 From  Spencer Dellenbaugh : How does it decide when to give up?
10:36:07	 From  Max Heller : What would be the alternative to the eager technique?
10:45:53	 From  christopher : Maybe you could make a variable for y<=5 and another for x>y, etc, and then have to add a few formulas that prevent things like y<y etc
10:47:11	 From  Husam Salhab : V5 => v4 so we can get rid of it
10:48:35	 From  Gene Siriviboon : y could be 6 without satisfying any?
10:48:52	 From  Gene Siriviboon : So it’s not spanning all int?
10:54:40	 From  Thomas Del Vecchio : Thank you!