Is it possible to simplify this equation?

[Rectifier]

Hey there!
This isn't actually a problem from a book or something. Its a problem I have stumbled upon when I did some physics.

The problem
I have come to this equation and I can't seem a way to simplify it
$$Q_c^2 =Q^2 \frac{d_1^4+d_2^4}{(d_1d_2)^4} \cdot (d_1^2+d_2^2)^2 $$

The attempt
As I have said, this is my last step. For those who are interested can go to the physics sub-forum and see my thread about this problem there. And don't worry this is not a double post. I ask about the mathematical side of the problem here and about the physical side of the problem there. Here is the link:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=769683

 

[Domenico94]

Actually not...you can't express the term (d1^4 + d2 ^ 4) as a product. That's the simplest form you reached

 

[PeroK]

The expression in $d_1$ and $d_2$ is in its simplest form. As Domenico has already said!

 

[Ray Vickson]

Hey there!
This isn't actually a problem from a book or something. Its a problem I have stumbled upon when I did some physics.

The problem
I have come to this equation and I can't seem a way to simplify it
$$Q_c^2 =Q^2 \frac{d_1^4+d_2^4}{(d_1d_2)^4} \cdot (d_1^2+d_2^2)^2 $$

The attempt
As I have said, this is my last step. For those who are interested can go to the physics sub-forum and see my thread about this problem there. And don't worry this is not a double post. I ask about the mathematical side of the problem here and about the physical side of the problem there. Here is the link:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=769683

I will give you a seemingly useless but very serious answer: define "simplify". This could be "simplify for accurate and efficient computation", "simplify for later use in such-and-such" (where---really---one form might make future analysis a lot easier than another), or perhaps "simplify for solving for $d_1$", say, or ... ? One of the major problems facing developers of computer algebra systems is the question I started with: define 'simplify', since they need to deal with it when a user asks the package to perform simplification.

 

[Rectifier]

Thank you for validating my suspicion.

I will give you a seemingly useless but very serious answer: define "simplify". This could be "simplify for accurate and efficient computation", "simplify for later use in such-and-such" (where---really---one form might make future analysis a lot easier than another), or perhaps "simplify for solving for $d_1$", say, or ... ? One of the major problems facing developers of computer algebra systems is the question I started with: define 'simplify', since they need to deal with it when a user asks the package to perform simplification.

Sorry that I wasn't clear with my question. Concidering your definitions I fould say: simplify for solving for $Q_c$