I do not vote (at the forum). And do not look much after that (though it is a kind of motivation I hate everything towards "Mitarbeiter des Monats").

@Preben Alsholm 

I think he means, that the inner integral is solved, but Maple can not continue with that.

Just load up the sheet to have a look at it (zipped, if large).

Use the "green arrow" at the end of the menu at the reply editor here.

Alejandro, thank you, I have to think about it for nested situations.

F := t -> a0+(a1+(a2+t*x)*x)*x;
F(a3+a4*x);

                 a0 + (a1 + (a2 + (a3 + a4 x) x) x) x

Alejandro, thank you, I have to think about it for nested situations.

F := t -> a0+(a1+(a2+t*x)*x)*x;
F(a3+a4*x);

                 a0 + (a1 + (a2 + (a3 + a4 x) x) x) x

I would call him a 'Lehrer', but in an older and more genuine sense than you might find it translated by a usual dictionary.

And that does not depend on badges ... unnamed but known others deserve that attribute as well

Provide (ASCII) code, not pictures. Nobody will type that it: no copy&paste ---> no good answers

Ok, if you know, that your A is (theoretical) invertible, it means that there is exactly 1 solution.

However you should not use the inverse of the matrix to find it:

• it is 'expensive' ( = slow) to find the inverse
• it may be 'numerical unstable' to calculate it

Usually Maple cares quite well to for all while numerical solving that stuff, do not try to
to be better (except for very good reasons).

Already using Digits:= round(evalhf(Digits)) [ = 14 on many machines] may give all
you need in going that way.

Ok, if you know, that your A is (theoretical) invertible, it means that there is exactly 1 solution.

However you should not use the inverse of the matrix to find it:

• it is 'expensive' ( = slow) to find the inverse
• it may be 'numerical unstable' to calculate it

Usually Maple cares quite well to for all while numerical solving that stuff, do not try to
to be better (except for very good reasons).

Already using Digits:= round(evalhf(Digits)) [ = 14 on many machines] may give all
you need in going that way.

You have to use a 'seed value', http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_seed.

Otherwise the system is intentended do give the same answer to have reproducable results.

You may search this forum for normal variates and should find some threads.

Using Excel (and inverting) is not a good idea: except the latest version (10 I think) it will
give very bad results (period ~ 32.000), while the latest Excel uses methods, which are in
Maple as well.

So better try to find out (using the help), how to manage the problem within the same SW.

You have to use a 'seed value', http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_seed.

Otherwise the system is intentended do give the same answer to have reproducable results.

You may search this forum for normal variates and should find some threads.

Using Excel (and inverting) is not a good idea: except the latest version (10 I think) it will
give very bad results (period ~ 32.000), while the latest Excel uses methods, which are in
Maple as well.

So better try to find out (using the help), how to manage the problem within the same SW.

@hirnyk 

You last contribution(s) are not shown, if scanning the board through
http://www.mapleprimes.com/recent/all.

Even if you posted 2h ago there you see last action = 3 Nov ...

@hirnyk 

You last contribution(s) are not shown, if scanning the board through
http://www.mapleprimes.com/recent/all.

Even if you posted 2h ago there you see last action = 3 Nov ...

1. Perhaps I would do

  10*x-20*piecewise(x < 2, 0, 2 <= x, x-2);
  -int(%, x);
  g:=unapply(%,x);
  
  g(2);
                                 -20

2. Another example that this board vandalizes the sequence of
contributions and discussion. How sad to just aim 'gimmy result'.

1. Perhaps I would do

  10*x-20*piecewise(x < 2, 0, 2 <= x, x-2);
  -int(%, x);
  g:=unapply(%,x);
  
  g(2);
                                 -20

2. Another example that this board vandalizes the sequence of
contributions and discussion. How sad to just aim 'gimmy result'.