most of time is give me true my substittuetion but  a lot time i saw it is not make my substittuetion true and this time i figure out which author did   and outcome is what i am looking but when i do that is so different where is problem 

f-m.mw

In here i did try my best and my equation outcome are ok but is not same as author did i dont know why, beside this he try to use two ode for constructing  a new ode which find of one solution of this can be the third solution of ode!
 i have to use eq(5) for my orginal ode  but eq(5) contain f(x) and g(x) which by some assumption  and taking two other ode eq(6) and eq(7)  they construct new one which is eq(14) and by f(xi) and g(xi) have corelation with W(xi) which is third ode  as in eq(9) and eq(11) mentioned, i try to use the solution which author mentioned but is not give me solution of third ode by using corelation what is problem here? also in eq(21)  and eq(25) when thus parameter are satisfy must our odetest be zero

i will update two maple file which realted separatly for constructing  equations and other is for apply and satisfy the solution for ode!

F-p.mw

ode-17.mw

To find the recently introduced new command that compares two expressions, I prompted the large model: 

Answer:

A useful Maple command specifically for comparing two expressions is verify.
Use it like this:
verify(expr1, expr2, equal);
This asks Maple whether the two expressions are mathematically equal.
If you want a more robust algebraic check, a very common alternative is:
is(simplify(expr1 - expr2) = 0);
For polynomial expressions, this is also common:
evalb(expand(expr1 - expr2) = 0);

This is not what I was looking for. I was looking for the command that visually highlights differences.
Can the prompt be improved?

Greetings, Friends.

I have a function f(t) which is a density function. It has a [0,2] interval and integrates to unity. I convolve f(t) with itself to get g(t). It has a [0,4] interval and integrates to unity. All is well with that and I understand.

BUT, the boundary of g(t) shouild be on the interval [0,4/sqrt(3)]. This is based upon both my simulation and other analyses.

At present, the area of the g(t) function on the [4/sqrt(3), 4] interval accounts for 1.408701% of the area under the curve. Not a "trivial" nor "throwaway" amount.

Does anyone know of a way to "re-scale" or modify my convolved result g(t) so that all of the resultant area under the curve is on the [0,4/sqrt(3)] interval?

My work is attached.

Download SphereConvolution.mw

Hi mapleprimes, and all,

did a little exploration with the Matrix() and ifactor() Maple commands.

prime_factorization_of_one_digit_numbers.mw

have a look
no warnings, and no errors

Regards,
Matt

Note that Maple 2026 is not an available option on the product list above. This operation was used in Maple 2026.

I obtained code for the shuffle product of two lists from the AI Assistant. Included in the code was the following list operation to extract a sublist.:

 defined list  u:=[a,b,c]:  extract the sublist using the operation u[2..-1] which gives correct result [b.c]

Normally, I would have expected this operation would be encoded as [op(2..-1),u] . 

Is the shortcut notion reliable or should the operation have been encoded using op() to be safe.

Dear Ladies and Gents ,

I am sorry to ask such a supposedly trivial thing :

what is the differences in the 2 A defined in the attached "worksheet" ?

Thank you.

I am tired and my brain is bugged tonite.

Have a great evening.

Jean-Michel

 a while ago there is a code for changing function from trig to hyperbolic and viceversa  but i can't find that code except changind xi=I*xi there is another one?

Download convert.mw

Hi,

Is there a way to get a date from a Julian Day Number in Maple? I can easily calculate a Julian Day Number in Maple, but sometimes I need to go in the other direction. I have searched for a solution. Google AI has suggested a couple solutions, but the Maple commands it gives don't seem to exist (certainly not in Maple 2022.2).

Thanks,

John

Sirs,

Today I encountered the following issue. I am working in a Maple worksheet with the variable "xi", which looks as ξ on the Maple output screen.

I am also working in LaTeX with the aid of Scientific Word, a LaTeX-interpretator.

I copied an expression from the screen (Scientific Word) containing the letter ξ (in LaTeX \xi, on the screen as the letter ξ) and put that expression in my Maple worksheet. In the output screen of Maple my variable "xi" and the copied expression from LaTeX (ξ) looked exactly the same. However, for Maple those variables were different, respectively "xi" and "\316" as I noticed in my *. mw file.

My calculations caused my a problem, I did not get what I expected. Firstly, I thought I made somewhere a mistake but after all the copy from the screen in Scientific Word turned out to be the culprit. So, it is not wise to make a screen copy. 

But, why are the two variables looking the same in Maple while they are not for the calculations? 

Ed Veling, The Netherlands

Dear Power users, I probably have a stupid question. Till now I converted my data txt files first to excel to import them in Maple 2026. I imagine there must be a better method. I have attached a sample file. As a side question is it possible to import several files at once? Thank you for your support

F12_1.txt

Maple 2026 and Maple 2025.2

Is this a bug in limit? or as designed?

Doing 

limit(sol,[_C3 = 0, _C4 = 0])

Gives internal error. But

limit(sol,_C3 = 0);
limit(%,_C4 = 0);

works and no error.

Worksheet below. I've had problems before with multilimit. I think I need to change my code to do limit one by one from now on.

Download limit_problem_april_2_2026.mw

In the attached file, I would like to evaluate the integral according to (16) and the minimum according to (17). I would appreciate your help. The goal is to calculate the coefficients a and b.

Euler_eq.mw

Currently I generate unique local symbol inside a proc to use for intergation dummy variable. And need to make sure this symbol is not already used somewhere else in other proc. (so all symbols display different)

So I use this code

`tools/genglobal`[1](tau, 1, :-reset);
z:=`tools/genglobal`(tau);
z:=`tools/genglobal`(tau);

Which works ok, except that the symbols generated do not display nice in Latex.  Instead of  

which when rendered in latex look like this 

Which is bad as you see.  It looked like tau is being multiplied by a number.

I'd like to get the generated symbols to be  tau__1 and tau__2 instead of tau1 and tau2 and so on. Which will now display much nicer.

Is there a way in Maple to still use `tools/genglobal`(...); but generate subscripted unique symbols, where only the subscript number changes like the above.

Not able to find what syntax to use. Also not able to find any help pages on tools/genglobal.

If there is no way, I can make a global  N counter and use that to increment it and append it to a local variable, something like

foo:=proc()
   local z:=convert( cat("tau__",N), '`local`');
   z;
end proc;

THen call it as

But would prefer to use `tools/genglobal` if possible.

Any other suggestions?

Maple 2026

Dear MaplePrimes Community,

With the rapid advancement of technology, it has become increasingly important to improve our workflows and reduce repetitive manual tasks. In my research, I frequently use Maple to solve  PDEs and obtain analytical solutions. However, one major difficulty I face is the time-consuming process of manually converting each result into LaTeX format.

In many cases, Maple produces multiple solutions, and I must copy and convert each one individually into LaTeX. This process is tedious, inefficient, and prone to formatting errors.

Therefore, I would like to ask:

Is it possible to establish an automated link or workflow between Maple and LaTeX such that, after solving a problem in Maple, all resulting expressions are automatically exported and inserted into a LaTeX document in the desired format and location?

Ideally, I am looking for a system where:

• Maple solutions are automatically converted into LaTeX code,

• The equations are directly placed into a specified LaTeX file or section,

• The process works for multiple solutions without manual intervention.

Furthermore, if such integration is possible, can this idea be extended to connect Maple with multiple tools (for example, Maple → LaTeX → plotting or document-generation systems), creating a more advanced automated workflow?

I would greatly appreciate any guidance, examples, or best practices for implementing such a system.

Thank you very much for your help.