Boston publishing company is seeking reviewers for the technical evaluation of Maple 10 algorithms. These algorithms will serve as interactive math tutorials for a premiere college-level student Web site. Experience using Maple, Mathematica or MathCAD is required. A strong mathematics background is preferred. All work will be completed online using a PC. The term of the contract is approximately 15 hours per week for 6 months.

I have been using solve in Maple 9.5 to solve a system of equations with a very large solution (90,000 terms provided in about 10 mins). Access to Maple 9.5 was unvailable so I used Maple 9; I gave up waiting after several hours and seeing memory use go up to 1Gb. Is there a big difference in the coding to explain this. Also, I don't yet have Maple 10; does it have any further improvements?

One of the good things about Maple 10 is if I type > f_max:=10; then max is written as a subscript of f; and the variable f_sub_max is asssigned the value 10. However, there is problem with this syntax. One assigned > f_max:=10; I can not use f as a variable name. Is there any solution to the problem? I like the varaible names with subscripts rather than underscore.

If you have been coming to MaplePrimes for a while you may notice something slightly different about the site. The change is subtle, but it is there. The URL for the site is now www.mapleprimes.com. You don't need to change anything though, your bookmarks will continue to work, beta.mapleprimes.com has been changed to forward to the new URL. If you are a Maplesoft EMP customer looking for the contents of the old mapleprimes.com, please see the Maplesoft EMP information page. The site is still in Beta, as we are still working on a number of major changes to the site.

I am a graduate student in Amir kabir University in Iran, I am in desprate need of help, My problem is I have a 4D lie algebra,and a metric tensor onfilteredo calculate Ricci tensor & some other things,in maple,or where ever it could be done. PLEASE HELP Me. Sencerely, Fatemeh

I make som calculations in Maple and I get an output like: diff(y(t),t) = y(t) + u(t) Later I export this to Latex but I'd prefer the shorter notaion with "dots" on the time derivative, i.e. y_dot(t) = y(t) + u(t) Is there a way to get maple to output this?

When doing an implicit plot recently, I ended up with a whole large triangle which was completely tessellated with much smaller triangles. The checking of other graphs and numerical data of the function in this region, it was very clear that the implicit function should be a well defined line in this region. Further look at the code for implicitplot() indicated that, after some setup work, it ultimately called exactly the same routine (`plot/iplot2d`()) as plots[contourplot]() with the option "contours=[0]" to do the actual calculations. I then discovered that when I called contourplot() directly with the "contours=[0]" option I got a correct implicit curve consistent with my other data and with no tessellations.

As currently programmed, fsolve() does not do numerical derivatives for systems of equations. The reason for this is that subs() is used instead of eval() when evaluating derivatives. [Note: jacob is the symbolically defined jacobian of the system of equations and lsub is the sequence of appropriate numerical substitutions (not the "list" of substitutions the mnemonic might suggest).] The original statement (in `fsolve/sysnewton`) is: A:=traperror(evalf(subs(lsub,jacob),Digits-5+n)); The functions evalf() and subs() apparently do no know how to work together to produce numerical derivatives. However, the following statement does work.

Maple displays a defined procedure (yours or Maple's)as output when you enter definition or when you execute eval(). It should be noticed that in either case, Maple uses its own well defined indention scheme, regardless of what indention scheme you used or didn't use when you input the procedure. Now if you want to edit the procedure, and your only copy is gotten by copying Maple's output to an input line, you will have to deal with Maple's hidden indention characters at the beginning of each line. I have been unable to find any Help material on this, and, in particular, I have not been able to find any way to edit (delete or input) these characters directly. However, they are all invisibly located in the blank space, which is visible, at the start of each indented line. The code seems to be of the form "indent a fixed number of spaces more than the previous line". These fixed numbers are one of three values, a positive number (approx. 3), 0, or a negative number (approx. -3).

As most of you have probably experienced, even Maple 10.4 in standard 2D Maple input has some strange editing behavior. Most of it is of the variety of "What you see is Not what you get". There are two basic kinds of things that can happen: (a)You get strange errors that seem impossible from the code that you can see, such as "missing operation" or "object used as name" or even "non-matching delimiters"; and (2) Your editing action happens much further away or much more extensively than your cursor position or highlighting would indicate. This apparently happens because Maple is creating a parsing structure on the fly behind what you are editing and not visible to you. When some incomprehensible errors happen or Maple seemingly does not want to allow you to edit what you see is wrong, sometimes the only remedy is to retype whole blocks of code (possibly creating other errors in the process requiring the same cure, etc., etc.). Till Maple can supply us with a structural viewer that would allow us to easily find and correct such problems, I want to pass along some tips I have learned in my frustration.

I kept seeing in the help pages for linalg that it is being superseded by LinearAlgebra, so I have tried to work with LinearAlgebra. However, it turns out that LinearAlgebra is very clumsy and annoying for symbolic computations. LinearAlgebra was clearly meant to be a numerical calculation package. Unfortunately, the desiderata for numerical calculations are not the same as for symbolic calculations. The main feature of LinearAlgebra which causes this clumsiness is the requirement that all elements of a Matrix be defined. To do symbolic calculations this means assigning a symbol to use with an index for the undefined elements of the Matrix. The name of this symbol has to be different from that of the Matrix itself, and the indexed symbol is not an array or a table or a Matrix. Already then you have two names for essentially the same thing. ==> First Problem. Now, lets say you do some calculations with these Matrices and end up with expressions that that contain the indexed symbolic names. To assign other values to these indexed symbolic names in the resulting expressions, you have to assign the indexed symbolic names new values and you cannot use matrix operations for that since these indexed symbolic names are not arrays or Matrices or even tables. ==> Second Problem. Now if you want to unassign the symbolic names again or assign new values and have these values show up in the original Matrices, you have to reassign the symbolic names and reassign the values in the original Matrices. (Matrix elements cannot be unassigned.) In other words, do the job twice. ==> Third Problem.

There is a general problem which arises when one uses assume() that can be quite confusing. I seems that once an x~ is passed on by assigning a data structure containing it to another name, it becomes an entity on its own, a sort of vintage x~, with no connection back to the original variable on which the assumptions were made. It has no unique name and no way to access it for manipulation or redefinition. The code x:='x' does not affect these vintage x~'s. Even the function addionally() does not affect these vintage x~'s. Thus one can have a whole set of x~'s of different vintage in one's data structures with no way to tell them apart or manipulate them. This has tied some of my codes in knots before I realized what was happening. It would be so much less frustrating if each new vintage received a unique name that could be referenced by the user.

I have seen a number of forum questions concerning showing students the steps in a problem. There seems to be some confusion about how to do this reliabley and easily. A method I have found useful is seen below:

Hi everybody! I have to solve the following PDE (Heat equation), analytically or "numerically" (using a numeric method). My problem is mainly with the boundary conditions, which I don't know how to define: (1) U(x,t)'t = aU(x,t)''x (2) U(x,0) = T0 (3) -k*U'(0,t)x = q (4) -k*U'(d,t)x = h*(U(d,t)-T1) when a, TO, T1, k, q, d, and h are all constants! pay attention that the conditions (3) and (4) are on the derivative of U ! Thanks (: RedFox.

I have noticed that my text that was converted from MW to HTML is not properly displayed. If you look at the end of the text, you will se the command > f:=x->piecewise(x FSeries:=FSeriesOfFunction(f,-Pi..Pi); which is not correct. The part "FSeries:=FSeriesOfFunction(f,-Pi..Pi);" is the next command. View the original worksheet via the MapleNet to see the difference. The problem is in the symbol "lower than" (which appears in definition of the piecewise continous function), because the publication system (or what) thinks that it is the begining of an unsupported HTML tag and the "tag" is removed. The solution is to substitute "lower than" for "< ;" (without the white space before the semicolon) and maybe the same with the "grater than" symbol.