## 630 Reputation

19 years, 285 days

## Use range...

I guess I would approach this by using MapleTA range instead of messing with the Maple randomization seed:

\$rA=range(1,100);
\$rB=range(1,100);

\$A=maple("randomize(\$rA):LinearAlgebra[RandomMatrix](2,2,generator=rand(-9..9))");
\$B=maple("randomize(\$rB):LinearAlgebra[RandomMatrix](2,2,generator=rand(-9..9))");
\$displayA=maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation(\$A))");
\$displayB=maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation(\$B))");

## wrong ed.sty?...

There is ed.sty in CTAN that is for inserting editorial notes.

I bet you have the wrong ed.sty.

Look on the Maplesoft website for the one to author MapleTA questions.

## line and ellipse...

It is surprising that Maple needs to be coaxed into finding the two solutions since it trivially reduces to  a simple quadratic equation. I expected your approach to readily give both solutions.

Here is the most direct workaround that I see:

replace solve({E1,E2}) with

subs(E2,E1);solve(%);

From here you can subsitute these two x-values into E2 to find the ordinates.

## middlebox...

I stil like to use

with(student):

middlebox(x^2+1,x=0..2,10);

It' so easy and to the point. No baggage.

I know--it's deprecated. I can hear the howls and screams. For Halloween some year I plan to dress up as my favorite deprecated Maple command.

## use fsolve...

Replace the curly braces { } in P1 with parentheses (  ) and in the last line use fsolve instead of solve. You end up with

X4 := {beta = .5666679932, lambda = -1.518022637, p = 4.035629244}

## Other way...

This should work in older versions of Maple:

with(plottools):with(plots):

eq:=A->z^3-z+A;

s:=A->evalf([solve(eq(A))]);

frames:=seq(
complexplot(s(-2+4*i/20),
symbol=solidcircle,symbolsize=30,style=point),
i=0..20):

display(frames,insequence=true);

Note: solidcircle is not solid if you use classic so use the standard interface.

## combinat[powerset]...

Try

combinat[powerset](L);

## 3/2 or 1.5...

Perhaps you are anticipating the result of

evalf(3/2);

I would hope that evalf(10.5) would not increase the implied precision of 10.5

## Closed form...

Axel is right. You are not going to find a closed form expression for the expected value of f(t) in terms of mu and delta.

Using his J, however, you can plot the expected value as a function of mu and delta:

plot3d(eval(J,[mu=x,delta=y]),x=1..2,y=1..2,grid=[7,7]);

What do you would you do with a closed form expression, if you had it? Maybe you can do this anyway without the closed form expression.

## Try this...

Maybe you want something like this in place of your fourth line:

DG1:= subs([phi[1] = phi1(phi2,phi3), phi[2] = phi2(phi1,phi3), phi[3] = phi3(phi1,phi2), v[1] = v1, v[2] = v2, v[3] = v3], DG);

This treats phi1 as a function of phi2 and phi3, etc.

## assignment...

In your section "Summary of eigenvalues" you need :=  (assignment) and not just = (equality).

## formats...

I copied the error message in your file (formatted as "document mode with 2D input") into another file formatted as "worksheet with 1D input". Then I replaced implied multiplications with * and (e) with exp. Then your equations parsed.

My advice is this: if you want to get anything meaningful done with Maple, use worksheet mode with 1D input.  It's just a really bad idea to use either document mode or 2D input.

## changvar...

This seems to work OK:

student[changevar](sqrt(x-y)=b,f3);

## forget the package...

Just forget about using VectorCalculus package and solve it directly:

pdsolve({diff(F(x,y),x)=Fx(x,y,u),diff(F(x,y),y)=Fy(x,y,u)});

## sets...

You could try

a:=convert(A,set);

b:=convert(B,set);

and then compare the sets.

For example:

is (a=b);

I don't know how effective this is.

 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Last Page 5 of 17
﻿