Bachatero

40 Reputation

4 Badges

8 years, 199 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by Bachatero

@ecterrab 

sure , no doubt it's always a tough call to maintain the compatibility with older versions. Well, since the math comes out right I shall be happy with a pretty print a bit less pretty, I myself used to be much  prettier than now ;-) and one day 2016/17/18 ... will be inevitable.

Dieter

@ecterrab 

Well, that's impressing Edgardo. I thought you'd give just a few instructions to "the boys" in order to fix the problems. Anyway, I won't be of the lucky ones who will be able to use this update since I am in 2015. No hope for that version ? Keep up the good work.

Dieter

@ecterrab 

 

Exactly, Edgardo and mathematically it works correctly , but anway it leaves a "feeling" which you really do not want ;-). Thanks for the time and I am happy to be able to give some useful inputs. Maple is a great Tool. Lets hope the programmer boys can fix it sometime.

@ecterrab 

ok, copy paste doesn't ork in my Firefox, so here abit clumsy but true:

 

What you posted works, no problem.

I am in Version 2016, march 21, 23:22 hours, Maple 2105

 

Now consider this:

d_[mu](Phi(X));

TensorArray(%);

...you have [ Phi[x1] ....], so Phi is properly differentiated.

 

d_[mu](Dagger(Phi(X)));

TensorArray(%)

...you have {d[1](Phi_bar).....], so the differentiation is symbolically there but not executed as in the above case.

 

Apparently the d_ command cannot properly handle the Dagger/conjugate option. Do you still have patience? Thanks anyway for coming back Edgardo.

 

@ecterrab 

Ok, I hope that you wil be able to find the needle in the haystack.

Dieter

@ecterrab 

 

Thanks Edgardo for this detailed reply, I get exactly what you get in Maple 2015 with all the updates I could get my hands on.  But the problem is there in equ. (5). There should be only the Phi with a bar on top without the (X) including sub x1. The result is not mathematically wrong but it destroys the pretty print and is annoying in large expressions when it occurs many times. I have noticed conjugate - diff problems since version 12 doing a lot of conjugate/Dagger stuff in Schroedinger, Pauli and Dirac equation manipulations.  Well, maybe you guys can fix it or find a work around.

Dieter

@Preben Alsholm 

Yes that way it works fine, but the diff option is choesen by the code (it comes out of some index notation). The declare works for phi(X) in that code segment but conjugate (phi(X)) gives the problem.

X has been defined by Coordinates( X) in Physics, so the diff doesn't give zero.

I wonder whether itis possible to telle the code to use Diff instead of diff?

@Carl Love 

Sorry it is in Physics and X represents actually x1,x2,x3,x4 (they are the set spacetime/diff coordinates)

1 2 Page 2 of 2