LijiH

90 Reputation

7 Badges

12 years, 334 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by LijiH

i did read it. my conclusion was that maple uses the "Trigonometric (and hyperbolic) method" to solve cubic equations.

with that being said, i still cannot seem to get maple to give me something that is less complicated.

i did read it. my conclusion was that maple uses the "Trigonometric (and hyperbolic) method" to solve cubic equations.

with that being said, i still cannot seem to get maple to give me something that is less complicated.

thanks!

I thought there was a more sophisticated way of doing it, like a latex preamble command or a package, but I guess splitting the output by hand will do.

 

thanks again!

thanks!

I thought there was a more sophisticated way of doing it, like a latex preamble command or a package, but I guess splitting the output by hand will do.

 

thanks again!

@jaytreiman

Maplequestion.mw

the code itself is rubbish, it's just an example to show that when you have a long module, the exported latex simply doesn't work: in the exported latex, when you compile, the end of the module is gone because it's outside of the first page range...

thanks for the reply.

for example, f:=x^2+(a+b)*x+(a*b)

I would like Maple to factor this into (x+a)*(x+b). In this case, Maple indeed manages to factor it without a problem, but I was wondering what if my polynomial is quite long and has lots of parameters, is Maple always "reliable"?

thanks for the reply.

for example, f:=x^2+(a+b)*x+(a*b)

I would like Maple to factor this into (x+a)*(x+b). In this case, Maple indeed manages to factor it without a problem, but I was wondering what if my polynomial is quite long and has lots of parameters, is Maple always "reliable"?

@Joe Riel 

that's good to know!

thanks again!

@Joe Riel 

that's good to know!

thanks again!

@ Joe Riel

 

thank you.

 

Sorry about the hassle, next time I will type up the code.

 

thanks again!

@ Joe Riel

 

thank you.

 

Sorry about the hassle, next time I will type up the code.

 

thanks again!

@roman_pearce 

 

thank you!!!

 

so that's why!!! I was starting to wonder why the "time elapsed" only indicated 1400 seconds when i am sure it's been running for over 12 hours.

@roman_pearce 

 

thank you!!!

 

so that's why!!! I was starting to wonder why the "time elapsed" only indicated 1400 seconds when i am sure it's been running for over 12 hours.

thanks for the reply. I didn't know about RationalUnivariateRepresentation, thanks!

 

In this case, the coeficients are actually parameters (real numbers)

 

it's been like 3 hours now, the memory usage of Maple is quite high (~3.5GB out of 4GB) but its CPU usage has been only around 1%

thanks for the reply. I didn't know about RationalUnivariateRepresentation, thanks!

 

In this case, the coeficients are actually parameters (real numbers)

 

it's been like 3 hours now, the memory usage of Maple is quite high (~3.5GB out of 4GB) but its CPU usage has been only around 1%

1 2 3 4 5 Page 2 of 5