@Christopher2222  I remember you from 10 years ago. I must say I am suprised that you are still using maple. I think you should learn how to program in JavaScript or Python (both are free to use) instead of wasting time and money on Maple. More or less everything that you can do with Maple you can also do with JavaScript or Python. MapleSoft exist for one reason and that is to make money (mostly from brain dead universities with a lot of money). That is also the reason the source code of Maple is not open source. As a libertarian socialist that is a strong believer of open source code (I also strongly dislike copyright and patents and I love decentralization and cryptocurrencies) I can tell you that mathematicians turned capitalists does not deserve any respect in my world. To quote what the mapleprime user alec said 10 years ago: "maple is amateurish". I tend to agree with that.         

@ecterrab my point is that the name theory of everything right now is a much better name for all these theories if you feel the need to claim that can explain "everything". The only thing that is certain is that things changes over time. Your current "theory of everything" is not going to be the same in 100 years. Many physicists today unfortunately appear to suffer from hubris. I am not saying that you do but when someone claim that they can explain "everything" I get very skeptical.       

@Kitonum thank you I will have a look at the solution you provided and evaluate. The two matrices of z and r looks like this. So you should be able to find the value of x and y for a given value of z. I unfortunatly dont have matrices that have the variable p included yet. 

@Rouben Rostamian  you can calculate x and y by using the two below equations

x = z / ( -b * p + a + p)
y = p * z / ( -b * p + a + p)

I am not sure I am explaining the problem sufficiently 

@Rouben Rostamian  I know that a=0.44, b=0.99, p=2.5, r=13.29 and z=100 000 produces x=215 054 and y=537 634 
but I dont like the fact that I have to include z=100 000 to get a solution. I want to be able to get values x and y by only give values for a, b, p and r. 

A name such as the "theories of everything" implies that the therories can explain everything in the universe including when my next visit to the bathroom will be. I know a physicist job is to try to understand the universe but a name such as the "theories of everything" is just inappropriate because the name is a black swan fallacy. http://www.conservapedia.com/Black-swan_fallacy  How can you know that the theories are "therories of everything" when you dont know what everything is? 

@Kitonum exellent! That might actually work. Thank you. 

thank you both for your answers. I was hoping for specific values for z and x since I need them.
Too bad! Back to the drawing board.

@Preben Alsholm ok thank you for your feedback! Do you think I need the unevaluation quotes in Maple 2017 as well?

I wonder if someone put drugs in my water yesterday? Because when I run the same code today it only took 0.015 second. Strange, I am 95% certain that I ran the same code yesterday and then it took way longer. It becomes impossible to test with a stop watch because it is so fast. The unevaluation quotes seams to make a difference though because the code take a bit longer time to run with them. I did a print screen because it seams to be very hard to select code and copy it in Maple on my touch screen. 

Very strange if you use this url 

http://www.maplesoft.com/products/maple/pricing/

you can see that there is a personal edition license for 239 USD available which is a ok price. 

However, if you go to the maple webstore you can only choose from student, commercial, academic and government. 

https://webstore.maplesoft.com/

Was this intentionally done to make people pay more money or is it an honest mistake? 

@Ronan thanks for your answer. Strange! I cant find the home user license on the maplesoft website. Do I have to buy from a third party?

@Carl Love thank you! Now I feel stupid lol The equation makes totally sense and it is so simple. Which is a good thing. I tried all equations except for that one! I cant believe that I missed that one. It just illustrate the importance collaboration. Again thanx.

@roman_pearce thank you for your input. I am glad that you think the m3 version of the Surface Pro 4 will be enough. I was so close to canceling my order before I learnt about the cpu:s dynamic frequency scalling. I thought the base frequency of 0.9 GHz was the frequency of the cpu. This would have meant that I could not run Maple 2016 nor Maple 2017 since the requrment is > 1 GHz. I speculate that the reason why Surface Pro 4 m3 version has such low base frequency is to conserve power. 

@Preben Alsholm thanx for your input! Yeahh I have not been around that much so I cant remember what month Maple came out for the last couple of years. March 2017 sounds cool though! Thanx then I have something to hold on to.

@acer thank you