I looked at the link , and I have never seen maple demonstrate its capabilities to do things like some of that ... like image regeneration ??

Maybe it can, but I haven't seen it .. Maple perhaps needs to advertise itself better ... demonstrate what it can do.

I use tecplot for making figures, and I had no clue what it could do until I looked at the tecplot website, and was AMAZED at the animations and 3D pictures it creates.

I've never used mathematica, and therefore know very little of the syntax.

But I recently started using wolfram alpha for simple things (you've got to admit it's nice!) and started learning the syntax very quickly when I wanted to change the range of my plot and had to click on "mathematica syntax"  .... I figured out in two seconds how to change every parameter of the plot that was there.

Now .. what scares me... is that when more and more people start using wolfram alpha before having access to a symbolic computation software [ think about the high school students that use wolfram alpha to check their homework answers ] ... when they're deciding whether or not to buy maple or mathematica, they'll chose the one with the smaller learning curve, since they know so much about the syntax already.

Using mathematica over maple might also have other advantages with compatibility with wolfram alpha .. like .. what if you get a result and want to save it in a worksheet ??

I see wolfram alpha becoming a mathematical search engine like google is a web search engine... and used A LOT in the near future.

Already I think more people use mathematica than maple .. and in the end one of them WILL be obsolete. I hope it's not maple because I've spent so long learning it!

---------------------

But I'm wondering .. how about the alogirthms ??

I think my symbolic computation professor convinced me to stop using sage by saying the algorithms were 20 years out of date.

Wolfram isn't a researcher in the field of symb-comp, like Keith Geddes is. I would think that Maple has more up-to-date, and efficient algoirithms than mathematica .... but in all my time searching for the answer to this, have not found one! Do any experts have anything to say here ?? I'm not sure which algorithms are better, Wolfram Alpha definitely seems faster not even considering that it's over the internet.

Thanks acer!

It's amazing how the untrained eye doesn't catch these typos. I'll be more careful next time.

I don't know why the heck this ended up here .. it was a response on a thread about 1D vs 2D input. Some people warning others not to use it, and others defending it saying it's okay to use if you're careful. I'm not sure how it ended up here, but the Matlab discrepency I still have to think about very very carefully before posting again.. it's not the digits, I think Maple is solving it symbolically and then evaluating, while matlab is using a numerical algorithm (spefically the Jacobi rotations), but as I said, I have to think about it when I get the time.

Thanks again!

Sorry, I got carried away with reading your discussion about 1D vs 2D and accidentally replied .. having forgot about my original quesiton.

> RET = 8.364128*10^(-4); RETs := cos(RET)+RET*sin(RET); RETp := RETs-RET^2*cos(RET):

> evalf(RETs);

                           cos(RET) + RET sin(RET)

> RETs := cos(RET)+RET*sin(RET): RETp := RETs-RET^2*cos(RET): RET = 8.364128*10^(-4);

                            RET = 0.0008364128000
> evalf(RETs);

                           cos(RET) + RET sin(RET)

 

This happened regardless of whether I defined RET before or after RETs.

Anyone know how to fix this ??

Thanks

By the way, how did you get those pictures of your maple output up ??

Did you take a screen shot of what was on your entire screen, and then insert it into your comment using <IMG SRC ....

Or instead of taking a screen shot, did you use some Maple feature about which I am unaware, which turns a selected portion of the worksheet into an image ??

Alec,

Have you tried "Ctrl+m" in the standard maple GUI ?? Once you do that your input will be the same as classic maple.  In fact you'll essentially be USING classic maple, only you now have more features.

My apologies if you already knew this,

Nike.

Has Maple 13 included a feature for adjusting axes thickness ??

If not, and if anyone on this forum works at Maplesoft, that suggestion should be made immediately ..

Maple's plots are not suitable for displaying in presentations to large audiences - since the axes are too narrow to see from far away. 

In matlab I can do for example: axes1 = axes('LineWidth',3,'FontWeight','bold','FontSize',16);  .. as well as much more .. what's slowing down Maple ??

Oh wow!  I was totally using it wrong, thanks!

Sorry b and c were defined incorrectly in my last post:

they should have been:

<pre>

 b := val2*vec1

 c := val1*vec1

</pre>

Everything else still stands (I think)

Thanks a lot Robert Israel!

That asympt command is very useful - I didn't  know about it before!  Much better than working with "series" and "taylor" .

Thanks a LOT once again!

And if I could edit things on this forum (can I ??) I would change the title to say "discrepancy" !!

You guys are brilliant, everything is working perfectly!

I just had one last question:

in the loop,

if I have, say,

plot( x^k, x=-1..1 );  is there a way to change the title of the graph for each k?

something like plot( x^k, x=-1..1 ,title="plot for value k"); 

where k is the index of the loop?

And is it possible for me to,

instead of doing "for k from 1 to 2" , could I do something like,

"for k = -1, -0.5, -0.25,0,25,0.5,1 " ?  If I want to plot the figure for each of those values of k?

Thanks Doug!

How do I change the directory where those files go?

I tried:

currentdir("C:/mapleInputs");

and got:

Warning, system/ssystem calls have been disabled in the options dialog.
        "C:\Documents and Settings\Nikesh\Desktop\clean\Research\IQC"
 

Thanks to both of you!