In the attached file, (6) is stated as "false." However, it is possible to prove with pen and paper that term1 = term2. In (5), the limit function is sought but not determined.
What am I doing wrong?test1.mw
 

Download test1.mw

In the attached file, I would like to determine the real part of the complex term2. I'm asking for your help.test.mw

Download test.mw

On my journey of discovery through the world of Maple, I would like to ask for help again:
How are the properties of variables and the indexing of sequences handled/determined? For this purpose, I chose an old problem from a challenging MO as an exercise and tried it in the attached file, which, of course, failed.

Download test.mw

The attached problem is from a 1988 MO. It can be solved using complete induction, paper, and pencil, and with some effort, yields a simple answer. It's quite challenging to do by hand, but with "derive", it only takes three lines and a fraction of a second. Mow test.mw

Download test.mw

I can't do it with Maple because I'm doing something wrong again. Therefore, I'm asking for help.

When calculating limits of real-valued functions, sometimes (especially in competitions) tricky approaches are taken using pen and paper. I repeatedly encountered the simple conclusion that, for example, for natural k, the value sin(k*pi) = 0. Thus, the function value is determined logically without specifying a specific number. There are numerous other examples of this that can easily be constructed.
My question after unsuccessful attempts using "assume" is:
How, for example, does Maple determine the value of sin(k*pi) from the assumption "k is natural" alone? Are such prominent values ​​implemented in tables?