4903 Reputation

15 Badges

9 years, 183 days

MaplePrimes Activity

These are answers submitted by tomleslie

Could someone explain what are the main (functional) differences.

I agree with Carl - there are none

On the other hand, if you ever want to make any money out of what you do with Maple (aka commercial use), then you really shoul have a "professional" edition

You might also find an issue with upgrades?

If you were to do this with pencil and paper, then you would proceed by comparing Matrix elements in your final expression. No other option is possible. So the question becomes - how close can I get to this process in Maple?

How about

A:=Matrix(3,3, (i,j)->a[i,j](t)):
B:=Matrix(3,3, (i,j)->b[i,j](t)):
ArrayTools[IsEqual]( diff~(C,t),

whihchwill return true!

So far as I can tell the equations you give in polar coordinates do not correspond to those given in Cartesian cooordinates.

See attached.

In maple 2015.1, the script


ought to provide output with units of ohms (indicated by a capital omega)

I do not know any way to force the display to use "engineering" notation


Adding a couple of simple commands to the end of your original worksheet, I come up with the following

_C2 is arbitrary

see attached.

As in

# Generate the expression and save it to a txt file
# because the file extension is .txt, then this file
# will be human-readable
   save f1, "J:/Users/TomLeslie/savetest.txt";
# Wipe the previous info, check f1 to make sure it
# has been cleared, then read it from the file and
# check again
   read "J:/Users/TomLeslie/savetest.txt":

Obviously you wiill have to change the pathName/filename in the above commands to something appropriate for your machine

Assuming that you want to import data from Excel ranges to and assign these to "sensible" Maple names, consider the attached (contains a lot of step by step comments)

Well actually , as far as Maple is concerned, you hav 32 "variables". You seem to thing that Maple can telll the difference between "variablles" and "paramters" with no guidance. Trust me, this is not going to happen!!

You have 32 unknowns and 6 equations, which essentially means that you can pick any 6 unknowms and solve for these in terms of the other 26. The attached woksheet shows one possibility

I'm not exactly sure what you want because your question is too general.

However tha attached file computes

  1. the "exact" solution,
  2. the "approximate" solution ( using a method with which I am unfamilar)
  3. graphs the difference,
  4.  computes the differnce between the exact an the approximate solution at a few points

I'm not sure if this covers your requirements or not - maybe if you can clarify in some way???

File extension should be .mpl

If I run

read "J:\\Users\\TomLeslie\\testproc.mpl"
create({{a, b}, {b, c}, {b, d}});

where testproc.mpl is

create := proc (data::set)
                        local G;
                        G := GraphTheory:-Graph(data);
                        printf("My Graph is %a", G);
                        save G, "J:\\Users\\TomLeslie\\graph.txt":
              end proc:

Then the file graph.txt appears where I would expect it to.

Before trying the above you will have to change the path names back to those relevant for your machine


  1. Put a colon/semicolon after restart - otherwise maple thinks that you are making multiple assignments (which you aren't
  2. Be careful with brackets. (), [], {} all mean different things to Maple: [] implies an indexed name of some sort, and {} implies a set. () is used for simple grouping of terms within an expression. You have used [] brackets within the expression you wish to solve - syntactically incorrect and confuses Maple

See the attached, which at least executes - not sure you'll like the answer though!

Kitonum's solution will do the solve() operation for each value of b. This can be avoided with

fb:=unapply( solve( [x+b*y=0, b*x-y=10], {x, y}),b);

to produce a function which can be evaluated for any value of b with

fb(10); fb(11); #etc

or for a seqauence of values

seq( [b=j, fb(j)[]], j=10..20);


If you use 2-D math input in Maple then pages are not "mangled" they are "correct"

However I only ever use 1-D math input - I have never worked out what the advantage of 2D math input is supposed to be, and whenever I try it, something breaks, so I avoid it like the plague.

Generally I only ever use the local help on my machine rather than the on-line version. However even on local help pages I have noticed (in Maple 18 and esp Maple 2015) that the "default" presentation format for examples is 2-D Math input: so before using, I change these by unchecking  the View -> Display Examples with 2D Math on the help page. This gives me 1-D math input and copy/paste actions then always work

There appears to be no way convert the on-line Maple help from 2-D math input to 1-D input :-(

A bit like Preben, I had a great deal of difficulty trying to figure out, from your code, exactly what you are trying to do.

I wasn't even certain that your starting equation was of the Lane=Emden type, so I tarted from started from a different angle: I chose the canonical Lane-Emden equation from the Wikipedia page, and wrote the code to solve it. This is attached below

If you compare the graphical output with that on the Wikipedia page, you will note that it is identical. I did also verify that (for the canonical problem) Maple can produce analytical solutions for n=0 and 1, which agree with those on the wikipedia page. However Maple was unable to produce the analytical solution for n=5, which wikipedia says is possible - although - I didn't try very hard with this. I suspect that if I coded the approach for n=5 as shown on the wikipedia page then I would be successful

You may have write privileges - but that doesn't mean that Maple does!

Try starting Maple by right-clicking desktop icon and selecting run as administrator, cos

fd := FileTools[Text][Open]("C:\\foo.txt", create=true,overwrite=true);

works for me

First 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 Page 103 of 110