You may try something like:

Typesetting:-mi("x",fontstyle = "italic",fontweight = "bold",mathcolor = "#c800c8",
size="18");

It produces an italic "x" in a bold large font and violet colour.

@Christopher2222 

An earlier initiative in this line was the Rosetta Stone. I think that the required expertise and maintenance of such a site can only be provided in a collaborative framework.

@Christopher2222 

An earlier initiative in this line was the Rosetta Stone. I think that the required expertise and maintenance of such a site can only be provided in a collaborative framework.

@Carl Love 

Paulina describes it in this article on the 2-D input interface:

Maple offers two modes for typesetting display, standard and extended. In the extended mode, it attempts to save more semantic information in a displayed expression so that it can be reparsed correctly after a copy-and-paste operation.

@Carl Love 

Paulina describes it in this article on the 2-D input interface:

Maple offers two modes for typesetting display, standard and extended. In the extended mode, it attempts to save more semantic information in a displayed expression so that it can be reparsed correctly after a copy-and-paste operation.

@Preben Alsholm 

OK, but in my opinion it is more practical to recognize the facts and, in consequence, take some systematic preventive measures. It may avoid a lot of frustrations. For instance:

1. Copy&paste the html source of your post to an editor and save it to a file (at least for any nontrivial post).

2. Avoid as far as possible using greater/less than symbols.

3. If using these symbols is unavoidable, replace them in the source with their TypeMK equivalents.

@Preben Alsholm 

OK, but in my opinion it is more practical to recognize the facts and, in consequence, take some systematic preventive measures. It may avoid a lot of frustrations. For instance:

1. Copy&paste the html source of your post to an editor and save it to a file (at least for any nontrivial post).

2. Avoid as far as possible using greater/less than symbols.

3. If using these symbols is unavoidable, replace them in the source with their TypeMK equivalents.

@Preben Alsholm 

It is the same only for the simplest case of the frequency constant occurring within sin or cos calls, and only for a single frequency withn such calls. Thus it would not be useful for the solutions of most oscillating systems, involving different frequencies for the diverse oscillation modes, or for the velocities and accelerations (time derivatives of the coordinates).

@Preben Alsholm 

It is the same only for the simplest case of the frequency constant occurring within sin or cos calls, and only for a single frequency withn such calls. Thus it would not be useful for the solutions of most oscillating systems, involving different frequencies for the diverse oscillation modes, or for the velocities and accelerations (time derivatives of the coordinates).

OK. The system of solutions is a set of equations. And their rhs' are expressions as in my example above. So, one way to do it is using evalindets, by selecting the equations in this set, and applying the rule to their rhs only. Something as in this toy example:

sol:={x1(t)=cos((k*(m1+m2)/(m1*m2))^(1/2)*t),x2(t)=sin((k*(m1+m2)/(m1*m2))^(1/2)*t)}:
evalindets(sol,equation,x->lhs(x)=applyrule(eq,rhs(x)));
                  {x1(t) = cos(omega t), x2(t) = sin(omega t)}

Note that I am not using your actual example as you have not provided the input that produces it in text form so that we could execute it, and I will not type the output expression from your picture...

OK. The system of solutions is a set of equations. And their rhs' are expressions as in my example above. So, one way to do it is using evalindets, by selecting the equations in this set, and applying the rule to their rhs only. Something as in this toy example:

sol:={x1(t)=cos((k*(m1+m2)/(m1*m2))^(1/2)*t),x2(t)=sin((k*(m1+m2)/(m1*m2))^(1/2)*t)}:
evalindets(sol,equation,x->lhs(x)=applyrule(eq,rhs(x)));
                  {x1(t) = cos(omega t), x2(t) = sin(omega t)}

Note that I am not using your actual example as you have not provided the input that produces it in text form so that we could execute it, and I will not type the output expression from your picture...

These two examples belong to case 4 in the clasification that I have sketched above, as a correct primitive function is computed:

f1:=x^2/(1+x^24):
F1:=int(f1, x );
                                / -----                  \
                                |  \            3        |
                      F1 := 1/3 |   )    _R ln(x  + 8 _R)|
                                |  /                     |
                                | -----                  |
                                \_R = %1                 /
                                                 8
                         %1 := RootOf(16777216 _Z  + 1)
simplify(diff(F1,x)-f1);
                                       0

f2:=(x^4+x)/(1+x^24):
F2:=int(f2, x ):
simplify(diff(F2,x)-f2);
                                       0

Simpler examples exist where the method ftoc fails at the computation of limits of a correct primitive function:

int(1/(1+x^8), x = -infinity .. infinity, method = ftoc);
                                     / -----                 \
                                     |  \                    |
                        lim         -|   )    _R ln(x + 8 _R)|
                  x -> (-infinity)   |  /                    |
                                     | -----                 |
                                     \_R = %1                /
                                                 8
                         %1 := RootOf(16777216 _Z  + 1)

int(1/(1+x^8), x = -infinity .. infinity, method = contour);
       /                    1
2 I Pi |------------------------------------------
       |  /        1/2 1/2                      \7
       |  |  (2 + 2   )                  1/2 1/2|
       |8 |- ------------- + 1/2 I (2 - 2   )   |
       \  \        2                            /
                          1
     + ----------------------------------------
         /      1/2 1/2                      \7
         |(2 - 2   )                  1/2 1/2|
       8 |------------- + 1/2 I (2 + 2   )   |
         \      2                            /
                          1
     + ----------------------------------------
         /      1/2 1/2                      \7
         |(2 + 2   )                  1/2 1/2|
       8 |------------- + 1/2 I (2 - 2   )   |
         \      2                            /
                           1                     \
     + ------------------------------------------|
         /        1/2 1/2                      \7|
         |  (2 - 2   )                  1/2 1/2| |
       8 |- ------------- + 1/2 I (2 + 2   )   | |
         \        2                            / /


(factor@simplify)(%);
                                   1/2 1/2       1/2
                          Pi (2 - 2   )    (2 + 2   )
                          ---------------------------
                                       4

Doug's request remains whether a case 1 example exists, namely the method contour succeeding where no primitive function exists.

@Doug Meade 

OK, let us keep this issue open in wait that the stars get aligned. No problem, I have much more memory than spare time...

Actually, after the description in this page, it seems that part of the functionality of Mathematica lays in the WolframAlpha server.

Actually, after the description in this page, it seems that part of the functionality of Mathematica lays in the WolframAlpha server.