I know how to define a procedure and use print() as follows:

test := proc (x)
  print("x is equal to: ");
  x
end proc

This displays as follows:
test(2)

"x is equal to: "

2

But i would like to appear as follows:

x is equal to: 2

Where the "x is equal to: "-part is standard a "text-mode-block" with green color.

Can i accomplish this in Maple, and can i do more advanced formatting?

Best regards,

Martin

I want to define a band matrix using n vectors. Detial given maple sheet. please help me

Help.mw

I want to define a matrix of M by M which have some condition. detail given in maple file. please help me.

Help_Maple-1.mw

I explain the required matrix by taking some example hope you will be understand. Please make it quickly... I will be very thank full. Help_Maple-1.mw

I wan to define a square matrix for M and r detial given in Maple sheet. Please Help....Help_Maple.mwHelp_Maple.mw

I work entitled Point Exeter made ​​for Fast VII workshop on applied and computational mathematics 2014 Trujillo Peru.

  Punto_de_Exeter.mw   (version in spanish)

Atte.

Lenin Araujo Castillo

Physics Pure

Computer Science

Aslam-u-Alikum. How are you. I want to make band matrix by using two vector. Detail given in Maple fine also. Please help me urgent.Help.mw

Is it possible to find the limit
limit(int(x*cos(x)/(1+3*sin(n*x)^2), x = 0 .. Pi), n = infinity)assuming n::posint
with Maple?
Calculations suggest the one equals -1.

Hello

I calculated following two expressions, x1,and x2.

x1:=map(f,a+b);

x2:=map(f,y=a+b);

The results of these are

f(a) + f(b)

f(y) = f(a + b)

for each. And, I can understand the logic of this.

If I want to derive the result of x2 as f(y)=f(a)+f(b), how should I do about x2?

Isn't there other way than to write

map(f, lhs(x2))=map(f,rhs(x2))

?

Please teach me this.

Thank you in advance.

Taro

How can I get maple to integrate this expression numerically.

For a specific value 0<s<1 it should be enough to integrate from -40..40 instead of -infinity..infinity

Anyway. My maple version always hangs up :-(

(1/2)*(-4*dilog(-(exp(2*t)*s-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)/(-1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)+arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*s^2+arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*s^2+8*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(4*t)+4*dilog((exp(2*t)*s+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)/(1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)+4*exp(4*t)*arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))-8*arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)*s^2*t-4*ln(1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*exp(4*t)*s^2*t+4*ln(1-(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*exp(4*t)*s^2*t-4*ln(exp(2*t)*s-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)*exp(4*t)*s^2*t+4*ln(exp(2*t)*s+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)*exp(4*t)*s^2*t+12*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(4*t)*t-16*arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)*t-8*ln(1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*exp(4*t)*t+8*ln(1-(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*exp(4*t)*t-8*ln(exp(2*t)*s-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)*exp(4*t)*t+8*ln(exp(2*t)*s+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)*exp(4*t)*t-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(2*t)*s+8*arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(2*t)*s+4*exp(2*t)*arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*s-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(6*t)*s-8*arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(6*t)*s+4*exp(6*t)*arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*s+2*dilog((exp(2*t)*s+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)/(1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)*s^2+2*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(4*t)*s^2-arctanh((exp(2*t)*s-exp(2*t)-s+1)/((exp(2*t)+1)*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(8*t)*s^2+exp(8*t)*arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*s^2+2*exp(4*t)*arctanh((-1+s)/(-s^2+1)^(1/2))*s^2-6*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*ln(exp(4*t)*s+2*exp(2*t)+s)*exp(4*t)+6*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*ln(s)*exp(4*t)-2*dilog(-(exp(2*t)*s-(-s^2+1)^(1/2)+1)/(-1+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)))*exp(4*t)*s^2)/((-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(8*t)*s^2-2*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*exp(8*t)*s^2+4*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(6*t)*s-8*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*exp(6*t)*s+2*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(4*t)*s^2-4*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*exp(4*t)*s^2+4*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(4*t)-8*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*exp(4*t)+4*(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*exp(2*t)*s-8*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*exp(2*t)*s+(-s^2+1)^(1/2)*s^2-2*arctanh((-s^2+1)^(1/2)/(1+s))*s^2)

I have an equation as follows:

By inspection one can see that the last three terms can be simplified (factored) to

How can I coerce Maple to do this? None of the available tools seem to be getting close to this. A partial solution is like this: Writ a procedure as follows:

Fac:=proc(xpr,a,b);
  tmp:=xpr+(a^2+2*a*b+b^2);
  return tmp-(a+b)^2;
end proc;

and then call it:

Fac(lhs(eq),k0,2*Pi*n/L)=rhs(eq);

to get

which is what I want. But procedure Fac() is not general at all; e.g. it fails if the overall sign of the polynomial terms are different. There does not seem to be any way in Maple to determine the sign of a term in the sum of lhs(eq), I can only find ways to determine signs of a simple indeterminate. I'd like to make this procedure more general (which is trivial enough for a human) but I just cannot find any tools in Maple to support this.

Any ideas out there?

Mac Dude.

after a matrix operation, the result is not exactly the matrix i want

there is around 0.0001 difference difference in all element in matrix

how to deal with this random difference in order to be exact?

Hi everyone,

I have a very complicated function y with only one independent variable x, and want to fit or approximate it by a simpler function, say polynomial. Many books or maple reference seem to tell how to fit a set of data instead of a given function. But the argument x in the function is assumed to be continuous other than discrete, so I don't know whether it is possible to express datax in form of x's range such as 0..1, and express datay in form of the function. After that , maybe I can fit the two created data sets by a polynomial function.

Or, does anyone have a better or more direct way to do the fitting linking two fucntions?

I am appreciated for your help.

Best,

GOODLUCK

I have the following expression (obtained from an earlier calculation):

I want to collect all the terms under one summation. So I define a rule:

collectf:=proc(f)
A::algebraic*f(a::algebraic)+B::algebraic*f(b::algebraic)\
 +C::algebraic*f(c::algebraic)+D::algebraic*f(d::algebraic)=f(A*a+B*b+C*c+D*d);
end proc:

and then

applyrule(collectf(Sum),%);

I get

Error, (in +) unable to identify A::algebraic

I used similar constructs before so I think the rule is constructed correctly. I should, however, mention that I use the Physics:-Vectors package and in fact the expression I start up with here reads, in 1-d Maple inputform:

Physics[Vectors][`+`](Physics[Vectors][`+`](Physics[Vectors][`+`](-y*(Sum((diff(a[n](r), r))/(exp(I*Pi*n/L))^2, n))/r, (2*I)*(Sum(a[n](r)/(exp(I*Pi*n/L))^2, n))*k0), y*(Sum(a[n](r)/(exp(I*Pi*n/L))^2, n))*k0^2), -y*(Sum((diff(a[n](r), r, r))/(exp(I*Pi*n/L))^2, n)))

Is my problem related to the use of Physics:-Vectors? If so, how can I get around that?

TIA,

Mac Dude

How can I show the expression of the following summation as the output, not 11?

3+7+1