@acer  I use the first one. I corrected the "gridlines=[spacing(30,0)" for (3,0) and the x-axis goes from, 0..9. And I get this beautiful plot.

As you can see, on my computer, I see only one color of light gray (except for the principal aces).

Thank you very much for your patience.

Mario

@acer So I upload my document.

Espace-temps_de_Minkowski.mw

I took your advice for the Unit(s). The last thing to be adjusted is as follows. What I need is to have the light-gray gridline on the x-axis to be only on the values of 3, 6 and 9. Not on the 1, 2, 4, 5, etc. This plot will serve as the base for the rest of the work while I will be adding new plot to it.

Thank you for your patience.

Mario

@acer YYou are always a very good help in MaplePrimes. Very appreciated. But there is just one last little detail that I am trying to adjust. If you look at the plot that you have made possible:

The principal tick mark for the x-axis should be on 3, 6 and 9. It is important because I want the principal tick marks on both axes to give the sense that they form cubes. So after one second, the light will be at the point (3,1).

As you must have realized, I am creating a document (in French) for the introduction of the Minkowski diagram of spacetime starting with a Newtonian path–time diagram. And gradually adding the multiple spaceships. Then I will superimpose the axes t prime and x prime on it and show why they are at an angle and what that angle mean.

I am trying to get it right by reading the help but I don't get what I want. Sorry to bother you with that.

Mario

@acer Excellent solutions! That is the first time I see the InertForm use that way. Thank you for your answer. I choose this one:

labels = [x*InertForm:-Display(10)^8*Unit(m), `t `(s)]

that give the right outplut. Is there a way to put the the unit of meter inside a ( ).

I forgot to ask you one more thing. As you can see, the horizontal axis was with 3, 6 and 9. Could you show me how to fix that so that plot always show that, even if I zoom the plot?

Again, thank you acer!

Mario

I tried the document without the ToInert and only using CompactDisplay like this:

>CompactDisplay((v, lambda)(r, t))

And the result of a double derivative is clearly displayed:

So I will go with that. Here the newer version of the file

General_metric_corrected.mw.

Thank you to all that help me.

Mario

@Christopher2222 Your use of ToInert is very interesting. I have used it and it worked, almost correctly. When calculating the Einstein's tensor, there is the elements G[3,3] and G[4,4] where the second derivative of both function does not show the aliases. I wonder if it would work if we were to use the formula R[mu,nu]-1/2*R*g[mu,nu]. Unfortunatly, I don't know how to do that in Maple. I get error all the time.

You will find the new corrected document here.General_metric_corrected.mw

I agree that it would be nice if the CompactDisplay could work for multivariables. Hoping that ecterrab will see this.

Thank you everybody for your help

@Hullzie16 ... but you need to interpret things.. For example, exp(- lamkbda * Lambda) = exp( - lambda) and (lambda * Lambda dot) to lambda dot. Anyway, thank you for that.

@Christopher2222 and I am not even sure it will be compatible with the physics package. But I will remember that trick for other calculations. So thank you for your time.

@acer You are right. I simply forgot about that palette. Sorry about that.

@nm I know that Maple added this functionality for a simple case. But you can do a lot for basic things. See the included document I just made (3-D Rotating vector.mw)

I love LaTeX. I am not a pro but I manage to do what I need. I use Texmaker for it. I will start with IPE and change if it cannot do what I need. Tank you for the suggestions.

Mario

3-D_Rotating_vector.mw

@Christopher2222 Thank you! But AutoCAD is out of the question and GImp is too complicated. I tried it and don't like using it.

@ecterrab It seems that some terms have disappeared in the manipulation. Very sorry about that. I am playing with your "Physics Courseware Support: Mechanics" document. I am trying to determine the best way to express things in conjunction with a document I am creating about using the Lagrangian in Mechanics. You can see that now it works perfectly. Thank you both (jbromell 20 too) for your answers.

Mario

Example_1_corr.mw

Thank you both for your responses. But my mistake was that y = 0 .. a, not b. This was not making everything working the way I was expecting it to work. Sorry for that inconvenience!

Mario :-(

@mmcdara  and  Carl Love 24237

Thank you very much both for your help. Problem solved.

@Christopher2222 

Thank you for taking the time to look that up. For an unknown reason, Maple refused to cooperate. But today, I tried it again and it works perfectly. So it was clearly again a question of windows interaction with Maple. I should have taken the time to restart windows and try again. Sorry for the trouble.

Mario