@Christopher2222

Thank you! 
I agree. With all the great tools we have at hand today we get numerical accuracy for free which does not mean that the fidelity of the models require it. Education should emphasize on what a particular problem requires in terms of accuracy.

Not so long ago the slide rule was good enough to bring man to the moon ... and back.
In Maple parlance Digits:=4

@one man 
The output of Isolate is different. Any idea why?

@acer 

Thank you. This is very helpful.
Before asking I tried plot(...) assuming positive. I see from

trace(fsolve);# I thought fsolve is builtin and therefore not traceable
a := RootOf(JacobiCN(sqrt(2)*sqrt(alpha), sqrt(2)*_Z/2)^2*_Z^2 + _Z^2 - 2);
(plot(b, alpha = 0 .. 0.5, adaptive = false, numpoints = 7) assuming positive);

that assuming has no effect on the calls to fsolve.
What I still do not understand is the second call to fsolve that returns a negative value whereas the first call returns a sequence (last element positive) and the third call to fsolve returns a positve value.
Even outside the plot call I see this pattern.

untrace(fsolve);
fsolve(sol^2 - 1);
fsolve(JacobiCN(0.2952771861*2^(1/2), 1/2*2^(1/2)*t)^2*t^2 + t^2 - 2);
fsolve(JacobiCN(0.4037956981*2^(1/2), 1/2*2^(1/2)*t)^2*t^2 + t^2 - 2);
                        -1.000000000, 1.

                          -1.042514994

                          1.077400841

Comparing this with

allvalues(RootOf(JacobiCN(0*2^(1/2), 1/2*2^(1/2)*t)^2*t^2 + t^2 - 2));
allvalues(RootOf(JacobiCN(0.2952771861*2^(1/2), 1/2*2^(1/2)*t)^2*t^2 + t^2 - 2));
allvalues(RootOf(JacobiCN(0.4037956981*2^(1/2), 1/2*2^(1/2)*t)^2*t^2 + t^2 - 2));
                             1, -1

                   1.042514994, -1.042514994

                   1.077400841, -1.077400841

gives a consistent ordering.

Increasing the plot range and the grid point proportionally

plot(a, alpha = 0 .. 0.5*30, adaptive = false, numpoints = 7*30)

shows the same negative value for the second plot point.
What makes the value of 0.2952771861 special that fsolve returns a negative value? Maybe it is cn that can get close to 1.

plot3d(JacobiCN(sqrt(2)*sqrt(alpha), sqrt(2)*_Z/2), alpha = 0 .. 0.2952771861^2, _Z = -20 .. 20)

 P.S.: there is something else that I cannot explain about the sampling of the seond point

0.2952771861^2 <> 0.5/(7 - 1);
                 0.08718861663 <> 0.08333333333

The animation is not working with Maple 2024 and 2025. That's what I get. Former versions work well

@Terry 

https://www.mapleprimes.com/posts/222314-Who-Says-Maple-Doesnt-Have-Dark-Mode-

This has been asked often. Can you clarify to which user interface you refer. The new Maple 2025 interface is considerably darker. Is it still too bright for you (appart for the canvas which has not changed)?

Have you tried to cut down on blue color content in your monitor settings? Some monitors allow for a low blue or night mode.

The Screen Reader worked for me on Windows 10 four month ago. Then I had to update to Windows 11.

Your problem seems to be related to the access to the file system. I would be surprised if the numbers of monitors play a role. You could check by disconnecting one of them.

Maybe (and that is a pure guess) this remedy also related to file system operations

https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/242045-Are-These-Hyperlink-Crashes-With-Maple

could work for you as well.

@Samir Khan 

The installation of the redistribution did not work. It was interrupted when it searched the network for an MSI file. Subsequently, the installation programme was unable to delete the previous version of the redistribution .
I cancelled the installation, whereupon Windows informed me that the system had to be restarted in order to repair the installation.

This must have worked. The hyperlinks now function as expected.

Thank you!

@one man 
The mechanism was not driven with constant angular velocity. I gave it an initial kick.

Rotating the input link uniformly would require to exert an varring torque on the mechanism. In this video it looks like that two shafts are driven with elliptic gear drives to keep the momentum on the motor constant.

@one man 

Unfortunately, I did not see your last replies from 2023 and 2025. They show that you were as dissatisfied as I was that we could not find a better agreement. In the meantime I could identify the true root cause which I mentioned here. 

The prismatic joint that I introduced is not equivalent to you deformations. I should have added elasticity to some joints or the supports for a better agreement.
By the way, good hearing from you!

@TechnicalSupport 

Thank you for the feedback. The below is what I had in mind to address transfer functions that start with 180 phase lag

Download Phaseplot_workaround.mw

@acer 

That was tricky. It worked also for me. I should have asked earlier. Thank you!

By the way: Playing around with the file I send (to fully understand the behavior) crashed the Maple session that was running uneventful for 6 days.

@rquirt

It possible to have a close look at the code of PhasePlot with

showstat(DynamicSystems:-PhasePlot)

(I do not know if that is possible with Mapleflow.)

  11       phases := map2(map,z -> Re(argument(z)),Af);
  12       if not radians then
  13           phases := map(V -> evalf(180/Pi)*V,phases)
             end if;
  14       map(DynamicSystems:-PhasePlot:-unwrap,phases,radians)

The phase is calculated with the argument function which is defined over -pi..pi.
I think what is happening in your case is the following:

Phaseplot determines the first plot value for z with a phase value slightly lower than -180 (say -180.1111). For that z value the argument function determines 179.9999 degree.

Since it is the first value in a list of phase values the unwrap function cannot detect a phase jump larger pi (almost 2 pi in your case). Unwrap, which makes phase values smaler than -180 possible in your second example is therefore not effective on your first case.

The case where the phase is -180 degree for frequencies approching zero needs to be treated differently from Phaseplot.
Worth a software change request. It is clearly a weakness.

@sand15 

I send a SCR

@sand15 

Thank you for the answer. I still have it with Maple 2025. This seems to be a regression and migth explain other things I saw with typesetting recently that did not make sense to me.

I will report this.

Download mi_reply.mw