In my opinion with this approach, there is no chance to solve it, because you in 4 of your equations use random numbers generator.
So each recalculation will change the result.
Moreover again absolute base maths seems to be a problem.
Your equation 8 (D112) is:
while equation 7 (D99) was:
equation 6 -> D86 (one of random values! is used only in 2 above equations). So just write in D112:
and you can delete rows 85 to 110.
the same step by step up, and finally you have only
1) your constants in column B (by the way, have you noted that you never use const C - cell B5? - well this case it does not matter because the whole appoach is wrong.)
2) your initial values (you used all the same)
3) just one equation:
if not the last part - could be easily solved, but as with every calculation the jast part changes randomly:
no way.
Side comment:
this last part:
can be pretty well fitted with simple normal (gaussian) dustribution of standard deviation 0.5 and expected value of -0.5.
Of course with real gaussian one can go below -2 or above 1 (which are limits for 2 negative random and one positive).
so if one do not mind thin tails going out of (-2;1) range, such approach could be used:
Bookmarks