I have it with Maple 2023 as well.
I understand that this can be annoying because it interrupts the work flow.
Should be reportet.

@MaPal93

Have a look at the structure in the attached. I would go numeric

attempt_dot_products_for_C_R_reply.mw

@Christopher2222 

and probably less to ask. It is quite easy to use.

@MaPal93 

In your new attachment you applied innert operations everywhere. That is a bit too much. All subexpressions containing lambda[i] should evaluate to scalar expressions. The resulting polynomial expression should not contain any unevaluated matrix expressions (see dharrs answer).

And: assume is only needed for solve

There is probably also one transposition too much. Please check

Attempt_dot_products-_reply.mw

@dharr 

I agree with your no and see the potential complications. However, the first attachments of the OP evaluated to something where degree worked on. For this reasons I assumed that the commands I applied evaluated to a polynomial.

@Scot Gould @dharr

It happend again in a bigger worhsheet. This time I went back with the undo button and could reproduce it

Selecting r__1 -> typing d ->

This was not reproducible in a new worksheet (It later was in a second input line. Than it was not. Strange).

Reloading the bigger worksheet without executing it: The glitch can be reproduced with a subscript expression but not with a normal name (without subscript).

Reloading the same worksheet with Maple 2023 the glitch cannot be reproduced.

Reloading the same worksheet with Maple 2024  on a computer with more memory that suffered less from "GUI not responsive" does not reproduce the glitch.

Looks like a regression that potentially depends also on the system.

How to add this observation to the bug report?

@dharr 

It happens when I am so focussed on code editing that I cannot observe myself. If I type slowly everything is fine. It might have something to do with change equation labels, change of an index or deletion of some invisible characters.

The animation with the initial point is very instructive.

To be sure what I was looking at I did

implicitplot3d([f3], x1 = -a .. a, x2 = -a .. a, x3 = -a .. a, axes = normal, transparency = 0.7, numpoints = 5000, style = surface, color = [blue]);
plots[display](E3, %);

So the black dots are the solutions. At their locations the intersection curves of f1 with f2, f2 with f3 and f1 with f3 intersect. This would mean that at each solution 3 curves intersect or 6 curve segments meet. Is it possible to predict the number of segments without plotting them? Or the other way arround predict from the number and kind of intersecting curves the number of possible solutions?

Annother question I have: Sometimes, as here, there are infinite solutions. Infinite solutions mean a continutiy of points. Could it be that in the case that there are also infinite solutions, the  the pink curve locks into them. I.e. becomes itself a "continuous" solution.

@ecterrab 

I have just seen your reply by coincidence (I did not get a notification). Before I can reply in detail I have to solidify my landscape of physical principles. This will take time. I will see if I can dig out my old text books to verify whether they match other references. Its essential to have a common ground for discussion.

For the moment, I would like to thank you for your detailed reply

@ecterrab 

Excellent! Then I do not have to ask how to edit. Good that there is the Physics Updates project.

@Christian Wolinski 

I see

map(''`^`'', eqs, 2);
%;
            [^(a = b, 2), ^(c = d, 2), ^(e = f, 2)]

                  [ 2    2   2    2   2    2]
                  [a  = b , c  = d , e  = f ]

What you showed above, is it 2 times the same document opened in Maple 2020 and in Maple 2024?

What type of graphic document we are looking at?

Can you share a document with a drawing that shows the effect on your machine?

How does it look like if you change to print layout mode?

My guess is that something changed when Maple changed the Java IDE for the GUI, which happend from 2020 to 2021.

The GUI's of the two Maple versions should look different. Is that correct?

@Christian Wolinski 

Intersting detail. map  (a built-in function) must have undergone some changes.

Maple 2024

map(map@`^`, eqs, 2);
                  [ 2    2   2    2   2    2]
                  [a  = b , c  = d , e  = f ]

Maple 2020

map(map@`^`, eqs, 2);
Error, (in evalapply) invalid input: map expects 2 or more arguments, but received 1

Your variant works in both versions.

@Kitonum 

Thanks, for the work around. The use of ~ is only required for multiplication. Also here equations cannot not be treated the same way with arithmetic operators.

@acer @nm

On a faster machine (about 3 times on these specific worksheets) the effect is much less pronounced.