hi ..how i can rewrite answer in compressive format. that result seen readible and incomplex.for example how i can use change of variable, in order to final result has a short format...

thanks1.mw

I am having issues with Maple 2016 computing closed form solutions using the sum command. For example, sum((-1)^n, n = 1 .. infinity) evaluates to -1/2 in the help topic, however, when I run the command in a maple document, this result is not obtained. It instead returns sum((-1)^n, n = 1 .. infinity). Likewise, sum( a*r^k, k = 0..infinity) doesn't evaluate to -a/(r-1). How can I get Maple to determine closed form solutions for power series?

Let us consider 

Statistics:-Mode(Binomial(n, p));
                        floor((1 + n) p)

Up to Wiki, the output is not correct. Simply no words.

How to use IterativeMaps:-Bifurcation for two or more dimensional maps. For example, f(x,y)=x*exp(r1*(1-a11*x-a12*y)), g(x,y)=y*exp(r2*(1-a21*x-a22*y)).

If I set a11=1,a12=2,a21=3,a22=4,r2=1, then how can I get the bifurcation rsp r1. Thanks very much!

dsolve(f(x,y),y(x),parametric) in Maple 9.5 outputs an expression for y(_T) and for x(_T).

(from the book "Computer Algebra Recipes for Mathematical Physics by Richard H. Enns, section 7.1.1, finding the parametric equation of the brachistochrone)

but the same command in Maple 2016 outputs an expression for y(x) only.

Why do Maple 9.5 and Maple 2016 produce different output?

Where can I find a help page explaining or giving examples of dsolve, parametric?

I want to plot some color points in CIE 1976 color space with SpatterPlot command exactly as showed on the help page. When I try:

restart:with(ColorTools):with(ImageTools):
barvy:=Color("Lab",[80.38,13.50,7.96]); 	
SpatterPlot(barvy,symbol="box");

I got the error:

Error, invalid input: ColorTools:-SpatterPlot expects its 1st argument, colors, to be of type list({ColorTools:-Color, name, string, list({float, nonnegint}), specfunc({COLOR, COLOUR})}), but received _m2194815429568

Where is the problem?
 

with(IterativeMaps);
with(ImageTools);
Logistic := Bifurcation([x], [r*x*(1-x)], [.5], 2.5, 4);
ArrayTools:-Dimensions(Logistic);
ColouringProcedures:-HueToRGB(Logistic);
Embed(Logistic);

This is the code for Bifurcation program of the Logistic map. How can I change the black background color of this figure, and How can I save this figure.

Let us consider the improper integral

int((abs(sin(2*x))-abs(sin(x)))/x, x = 0 .. infinity);

Si(Pi)-Si((1/2)*Pi)+sum(-(-1)^_k*Si(Pi*_k)+signum(sin((1/2)*Pi*_k))*Si((1/2)*Pi*_k)+Si(Pi*_k+Pi)*(-1)^_k-signum(cos((1/2)*Pi*_k))*Si((1/2)*Pi*_k+(1/2)*Pi), _k = 1 .. infinity)
                    

Mathematica 11 produces a similar expression and a warning

Integrate::isub: Warning: infinite subdivision of the integration domain has been used in computation of the definite integral \!\(\*SubsuperscriptBox[\(\[Integral]\), \(0\), \(\[Infinity]\)]\(\*FractionBox[\(\(-Abs[Sin[x]]\) + Abs[Sin[2\ x]]\), \(x\)] \[DifferentialD]x\)\). If the integral is not absolutely convergent, the result may be incorrect.

Up to Pedro Tamaroff http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/61828/proof-of-frullanis-theorem , the answer is 2/Pi*ln(2) because of 

J := int(abs(sin(2*x))-abs(sin(x)), x = 0 .. T) assuming T>2;
-1/2-signum(sin(T))*signum(cos(T))*cos(T)^2+(1/2)*signum(sin(T))*signum(cos(T))+cos(T)*signum(sin(T))+floor(2*T/Pi)

B := limit(J/T, T = infinity);
                               2 /Pi

K := x*(int((abs(sin(2*t))-abs(sin(t)))/t^2, t = x .. 1)) assuming x>0,x<1;

     2*sin(x)*cos(x)-2*Ci(2*x)*x+Ci(x)*x+sin(1)*x-sin(2)*x+2*Ci(2)*x-Ci(1)*x-sin(x)

                         
A := limit(K, x = 0, right);
                               0

Its numeric calculation results 

evalf(Int((abs(sin(2*x))-abs(sin(x)))/x, x = 0 .. infinity));
                        Float(undefined)

which seems not to be true.

The question is: how to obtain the reliable results for it with Maple, both symbolic and numeric? 

Good morning Maple Expert,

I would like to explain the concept of piecewise curves in 2D & 3D to my students with plots.In this regard I request the associated expetrs in Maple to provide the appropriate Maple commands to get piecewise curves in 3D space.

With warm regards.

Mr.M.Anand

Associate Professor in Mathematics.

Hyderabad Institute of Technology and Management

Can i make Explore with number of parameters differs from parameter in explore?
For excemple i whant to make sum with 'l' values wich will declorate in explore, and 'l' - count of them will declorate in same explore, but it dont work, so is it posible?
 

Download Explore_Problem_Exemple.mw

I need yours hepl.  I work with the physics paсkage and I set:

with(Physics)

Setup(mathematicalnotation = true)

 Coordinates(X)

Setup(Dgammarepresentation = standard)

Setup(spaceindices = uppercaselatin)

Define(M, aa, mu, mu5, Pi, eta)

M_[mu, mu5] := Dgamma[mu]*d_[mu]+M+Psigma[A]*aa[A]-mu*Dgamma[0]-mu5*Dgamma[0]*Dgamma[5]+i*Dgamma[5]*Psigma[B]*Pi[B]+i*Dgamma[5]*eta

And next:

Dagger(M_[mu, mu5])

How is Maple explained that  

Dagger(d_[mu])=d_[mu]

conjugate(M)=M

conjugate(aa[A])=aa[A]

conjugate(i)=i

and so on?

Dear Friends, I work with physics paсkage. I have a quation. I don't understend how one works with metrics. For example, let:

Simple issue. I think it is a bug, but if not, it tends to cause logic problems with new users of Maple.

with(plots):
z := A*x*y:
A:=1.0:
plot3d(z, x=0..1, y=0..1); # works as expected
contourplot(z, x=0..1, y=0..1); # works
fieldplot(z, x=0..1, y=0..1); 
    --> Error, (in plots/fieldplo) invaled 1st argument (the function) 1.0*x*y

Is there something special about what the fieldplot expects for the function? I don't see it in the help. Or is this a bug?  

Yes, there is a work around, define all constants first

A:=1.0:   z := A*x*y: fieldplot(z, x=0..1, y=0..1); 

But I fail to understand why my example should fail. (Note, I have seen this situation for every version, so it is not new.)

Dear Friends, I work with physics paсkage. And I don't know how to simplify the next expression: Dgamma[mu]*a[mu]*Dgamma[nu]*a[nu]

(I want to obtain  the well-known result a² )

The command "Simplify" doesn't work in this case.

There seems to be a bug in determining the folowing integral analytically:

Maple gives as a result

However, numerically integrating it

gives

In fact, integrating it from a to b,

gives

suggesting that Maple thinks the integrand is just 3/2. If one plots it, then it becomes obvious that this is not the case.