I'm not sure if it's possible to find a formula with predictive qualities, but I thought I'd ask anyway ...

IOD.mw

         I'd like to draw a graph with its  vertices  of 3d style.  Just like following image：

  I did not find the desired choices for this graph.

Hi,

I would like to determine if some lengthy expression F is linear in one of its inderteminates X.
 I use to use type(F, linear(X)) to do this but I've just found that if F is piiecewise defined, then type(F, linear(X)) returns false even if E is linear in X...
For instance, let  F := a*X+piecewise(Y<0, X, b)
then type(F, X) returns false.

I do not pretend it is a bug: at first sight I would say that F is linear with respect to X but maybe the notion of linearity with respect to an indeterlinate must be interpretated as "linear on each branch" ?

For the moment I've circumvented the problem by doing this :
dF := diff(F, X):
has(dF, X): # returns {\emptyset} if F is linear in X
 

But, as I said, F can be a rather lengthy expression invoking a lot of piecewise constructors, and I don't think that computing dF is an efficient way to do the job.

Do you have a better idea to proceed?

Thanks in advance

When the Explore command results in a slider, for example like this:

The value shown next to the slider has only one decimal place, despite the fact that the slider can be easly placed at values in between.  Is there a way to change the number of decimal places shown on the slider label for the Explore command?

Thanks.

Hi ,

How to animate implicitplot?

Thanks 

Download LoveMaple1Anim.mws.mw
 

Download LoveMaple1Anim.mws.mw

Hello everyone.

I have a very simple question.  When I use maple to solve the following equations,  everything works as expected

solve({
a + b + c + d = 0,
d * (480-471.1) + b * (484.3-471.1) + c * (547.2-471.1) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-484.3) + d * (480-484.3) + c * (547.2-484.3)  + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-547.2) + d * (480-547.2) + b * (484.3-547.2) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-477) + d * (480-477) + b * (484.3-477) + c * (547.2-477) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-494) + d * (480-494) + b * (484.3 - 494) + c * (547.2 - 494) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-540) + d * (480-540) + b * (484.3 - 540) + c * (547.2-540) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-477) + m1 = 0,
a * (471.1-494) + d * (480-494) + b * (484.3 - 494) + m2 = 0,
a * (471.1-540) + d * (480-540) + b * (484.3 - 540) + m3 = 0},{a,b,c,d,m4})

Now if I add one more equation to it then maple won't solve

solve({
a + b + c + d = 0,
d * (480-471.1) + b * (484.3-471.1) + c * (547.2-471.1) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-484.3) + d * (480-484.3) + c * (547.2-484.3)  + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-547.2) + d * (480-547.2) + b * (484.3-547.2) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-477) + d * (480-477) + b * (484.3-477) + c * (547.2-477) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-494) + d * (480-494) + b * (484.3 - 494) + c * (547.2 - 494) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-540) + d * (480-540) + b * (484.3 - 540) + c * (547.2-540) + m4 = 0,
a * (471.1-477) + m1 = 0,
a * (471.1-494) + d * (480-494) + b * (484.3 - 494) + m2 = 0,
a * (471.1-540) + d * (480-540) + b * (484.3 - 540) + m3 = 0
a * (471.1-481) + d * (480-481) + mx = 0},{a,b,c,d,m4,mx})

Obviously,  using the first solve command,  I can solve for a and d.  I can substitude that into the last equation and solve for mx.  But for some reason, maple just won't do that for me directly from the second solve command.

Can someone help?  thanks

Refers to yMaple 2019.1

The command alias(X(s)=laplace(x(t),s,t)) will not be executed in the  code following it. It seems that the 'funny font' L used instead of the word 'laplace' ist not recognized. Maple 2018.2.1 works fine, since it doesn't use the 'L" but works with 'laplace'. Is there a fix ?

The ideas here are to allow 3D plotting commands such as plot3d to handle a `size` option similarly to how 2D plotting commands do so, and for the plots:-display command to also handle it for 3D plots.

The size denotes the dimensions of the inlined plotting window, and not the relative lengths of the three axes.

I'd be interested in any new problems introduced with this, eg. export, etc.

Download 3Dsize_hotedit.mw

If this works fine then it might be a candidate for inclusion in an initialization file, so that it's
automatically available.

I want to solve the following ode: 

ode := diff(x(t), t) = k*(a - x(t))*(b - 2*x(t))^2

k, a and b are positive real numbers and I want to add the condition that a-x(t) >= 0 and b-2x(t) >=0, in addition to x(0)=0

how to I do that?

Hi

I have been making a 3d graph of the level sets of a function. Here is the code for the 3d graph:

display(seq(seq(plot3d([i/sin(u), u, j], u = 0 .. 3/2, t = 0 .. 10, view = [0 .. 10, 0 .. Pi/2, 0 .. 10], color = i*j), i = 1 .. 10), j = 1 .. 10))

Each curve is a different level set- and I'd liketo colour them all individually -so people can tell tham appart. Any variation of the code I've made makes each of the curves black.

 

Is it possible to create the operator command : |x| so that it passes x to the VectorCalculus Norm function so that if I write:

>  | < 3, 0, 4> |

the result is 5?

I have a Maple program and i need to call a python script with a specified input (10 integers). The script returns a number that I would like to use in my Maple program afterwards. This is what I would do in shell:

```

result=`python model.py 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10`
echo $result

```

Is there a way to get the `result` using Maple? I checked the documentation for Maple and it is not very clear so I appreciate any help on this. Thanks!

Hi,

From a previous calculation, I got the following nested sum:

Sum(Sum(f[n]*g[q-n]*exp(2*i*Pi*q*x),q = -infinity .. infinity),n = -infinity ..
infinity)

However, to keep on the calculus, It is more convenient to have:

Sum(Sum(f[n]*g[q - n]*exp(2*i*Pi*q*x), n = -infinity .. infinity), q = -infinity .. infinity)

That is, permute the summation precedence.

Is there a way to automatically transform the first expression into the second one?

Hi everyone,

When my cursor is on an output, the paragraph style changes to 2D Output, as it most likely should. When I then go to a new executable line, it takes forever for all of my expressions to "light up" (meaning that it takes a while for me to be able to use them), and it takes forever for the paragraph to go from 2D Output to 2D Math.

I sadly don't remember when this happened, or what might have caused it, but if any of have any suggestions or answers, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks for listening,

A confused highschool student.

Hi,

I discovered that the option legend, when used in plots:-inequal, returns an empty graphic.
Is it a bug or a deliberate choice?

Anyways, is it possible to insert a legend in a simple way (that is without using textplot for instance)?

TIA