## the infinit summation maple ...

the infint  summation  maple cant evaluated it  when my variables  are more than one decimal number

;

## System of linear equations with roots of unity...

I have a problem that seems rather simple in theory, yet if implemented in maple there arise problems. I want to solve systems of linear equations that involve roots of unity.

This problem arises when trying to find explicit equations of multivariate polynomials of fixed degree through given points (together with conditions on the derivatives of the curve at these points). In the following case, the points are dented by P[i] and I'm looking for the explicit equation of the degree 9 polynomial through these points. Actually, I know there is a two parameter family of such polynomials, so the solution will be of dimension two.

Sorry for the rather crude implementation.

```with(Groebner): with(algcurves): with(LinearAlgebra):

t := exp((1/9)*(2*Pi*I)):
s := exp((1/3)*(2*Pi*I)):
a_1 := -1*t:
a_2 := -s*t:
a_3 := -s^2*t:
P[1] := a_1, 0, 1: P[2] := a_2, 0, 1: P[3] := a_3, 0, 1:
P[4] := 1, t*a_1, 0: P[5] := 1, t*a_2, 0: P[6] := 1, t*a_3, 0:
P[7] := 0, 1, a_1: P[8] := 0, 1, a_2: P[9] := 0, 1, a_3:

G := 0: var1 := 0:
for n from 0 to 9 do
G := G+add(c[k, n-k]*x^k*y^(n-k), k = 0 .. n):
for k from 0 to n do var1 := var1, c[k, n-k]:
end do:
end do:
F := Homogenize(G, z):
Fx := diff(F, x):
Fy := diff(F, y):
Fz := diff(F, z):
Fxx := diff(F, x, x):
Fxy := diff(F, x, y):
Fyx := Fxy:
Fyy := diff(F, y, y):
Fxz := diff(F, x, z):
Fzx := Fxz:
Fzz := diff(F, z, z):
Fyz := diff(F, y, z):
Fzy := diff(F, z, y):

f := unapply(F, [x, y, z]): fx := unapply(Fx, [x, y, z]): fy := unapply(Fy, [x, y, z]): fz := unapply(Fz, [x, y, z]): fxx := unapply(Fxx, [x, y, z]): fxy := unapply(Fxy, [x, y, z]): fyx := unapply(Fyx, [x, y, z]): fyy := unapply(Fyy, [x, y, z]): fxz := unapply(Fxz, [x, y, z]): fzx := unapply(Fzx, [x, y, z]): fzz := unapply(Fzz, [x, y, z]): fyz := unapply(Fyz, [x, y, z]): fzy := unapply(Fzy, [x, y, z]):

sys := [f(P[1]) = 0, fx(P[1]) = 0, fy(P[1]) = 0, fz(P[1]) = 0, fxy(P[1]) = 0, fxz(P[1]) = 0, fxx(P[1]) = 0, fyy(P[1]) = 0, fzz(P[1]) = 0, fyz(P[1]) = 0, f(P[2]) = 0, fx(P[2]) = 0, fy(P[2]) = 0, fz(P[2]) = 0, fxy(P[2]) = 0, fxz(P[2]) = 0, fxx(P[2]) = 0, fyy(P[2]) = 0, fzz(P[2]) = 0, fyz(P[2]) = 0, f(P[3]) = 0, fx(P[3]) = 0, fy(P[3]) = 0, fz(P[3]) = 0, fxy(P[3]) = 0, fxz(P[3]) = 0, fxx(P[3]) = 0, fyy(P[3]) = 0, fzz(P[3]) = 0, fyz(P[3]) = 0, f(P[4]) = 0, fx(P[4]) = 0, fy(P[4]) = 0, fz(P[4]) = 0, fxy(P[4]) = 0, fxz(P[4]) = 0, fxx(P[4]) = 0, fyy(P[4]) = 0, fzz(P[4]) = 0, fyz(P[4]) = 0, f(P[5]) = 0, fx(P[5]) = 0, fy(P[5]) = 0, fz(P[5]) = 0, fxy(P[5]) = 0, fxz(P[5]) = 0, fxx(P[5]) = 0, fyy(P[5]) = 0, fzz(P[5]) = 0, fyz(P[5]) = 0, f(P[6]) = 0, fx(P[6]) = 0, fy(P[6]) = 0, fz(P[6]) = 0, fxy(P[6]) = 0, fxz(P[6]) = 0, fxx(P[6]) = 0, fyy(P[6]) = 0, fzz(P[6]) = 0, fyz(P[6]) = 0, f(P[7]) = 0, fx(P[7]) = 0, fy(P[7]) = 0, fz(P[7]) = 0, fxy(P[7]) = 0, fxz(P[7]) = 0, fxx(P[7]) = 0, fyy(P[7]) = 0, fzz(P[7]) = 0, fyz(P[7]) = 0, f(P[8]) = 0, fx(P[8]) = 0, fy(P[8]) = 0, fz(P[8]) = 0, fxy(P[8]) = 0, fxz(P[8]) = 0, fxx(P[8]) = 0, fyy(P[8]) = 0, fzz(P[8]) = 0, fyz(P[8]) = 0, f(P[9]) = 0, fx(P[9]) = 0, fy(P[9]) = 0, fz(P[9]) = 0, fxy(P[9]) = 0, fxz(P[9]) = 0, fxx(P[9]) = 0, fyy(P[9]) = 0, fzz(P[9]) = 0, fyz(P[9]) = 0]:
var := [c[0, 0], c[0, 1], c[1, 0], c[0, 2], c[1, 1], c[2, 0], c[0, 3], c[1, 2], c[2, 1], c[3, 0], c[0, 4], c[1, 3], c[2, 2], c[3, 1], c[4, 0], c[0, 5], c[1, 4], c[2, 3], c[3, 2], c[4, 1], c[5, 0], c[0, 6], c[1, 5], c[2, 4], c[3, 3], c[4, 2], c[5, 1], c[6, 0], c[0, 7], c[1, 6], c[2, 5], c[3, 4], c[4, 3], c[5, 2], c[6, 1], c[7, 0], c[0, 8], c[1, 7], c[2, 6], c[3, 5], c[4, 4], c[5, 3], c[6, 2], c[7, 1], c[8, 0], c[0, 9], c[1, 8], c[2, 7], c[3, 6], c[4, 5], c[5, 4], c[6, 3], c[7, 2], c[8, 1], c[9, 0]]:
A, b := GenerateMatrix(sys, var):```

Solving this with

`simplify(LinearSolve(A, b))`

Gives a rather nicely looking solution. But the calculation strongly depends on the form of s, t and the a_i.

For example if we instead define

`s:=t^3:`

The computation takes much longer and the result doesn't take a particularly nice form. Similarly if we instead take

`a_1 := -t: a_2 := -t^4: a_3 := -t^7:`

the computation takes hours / days and the result looks rather ugly (huge coefficients). Yet both of these inputs are mathematically equivalent to the original one.

The thing is that I have similar systems of linear equations that I know must have solutions, but the solution vector that maple puts out has coefficients with thousands of digits (which after the above I suspect to be wrong). I know the systems are vastly overdetermined, but even removing all redundant equations does not solve the problen.

Is there a way to get the correct solutions with maple? Does anyone know whether a different program would handle this problem better?

## Histogram legend display...

How can I add legend to a multicolored histogram using display?

## How do I print all solutions of equation and conve...

I want to make some equation and convert to LaTeX to have some Exercises "Solve the equation"
My code:
restart; A := [1, 2, 3/2, 4, 5/9]; B := [2, 5, -7, 1, 8]; C := [-1, -2, -3, -4, -5/3]; for i to nops(A) do 'solve*the*equation'*A[i]*x^2+B[i]*x+C[i] = 0 end do
How can I get code in LaTeX, it's mean, I get "Solve the equation \$x^2+2x-1=0\$" and get roots (if have)

## how to make approximation for a big floating numbe...

how to approximate this number to The nearest decimal number by maple

0.6364562590

## subset of list ...

a:=[1,2,3,4,5]:

if I want b to have all elements less than 4 why can't I just write

b:=a<4;

?

## Iteratively change time step in MATRIX command...

In the link below is my code which generates numerical data of a Fourier series of an impulse function (not to be confused with the DIRAC DELTA IMPULSE).  The issue is as k increases the harmonic frequencies become faster than the time step which causes resolution issues at higher k values.  Is there a way to iteratively change the time step for each iteration of k value?  However, the range for t would have to correspondingly decrease or the file size would balloon by the corresponding change in k value.

So lets say my time step for k = 1 is 0.001 and my time range is 0..1, now for k = 1000 my time step would be 0.000001, but my time range would shrink from 0..1 to 0..0.001.  I hope this is not too confusing.  Maybe experimenting with my code will aid in understanding my request.

Thanks for any assistance

MATRIX_loop.mw

## Convert to explicit first order...

 >
 >
 >

In this link i attache the code , which is working on this Download Three_euqtions.mw and i got an error which is i couldnot understand. So, kindly can you help on this ??

## Can I get some help with mathematics...

Thats the solution

a)   -(2x+10)+8=4*(-x+1)

b)   5x+27=-9*(x-10)+7

c)   12x+2*(x-3)=7*(x-5)+1

d)    -4*(x+8) +14=7*(x-2)+29

## How to index a procedure F[i,j,k](x,y,z)?...

Using a Maple procedure is a very common task. For instance, here, F is a differential operator applied to any expression f

```restart;
F := proc (f) options operator, arrow; x*(diff(f, y))-y*(diff(f, x)) end proc;
/ d   \     / d   \
F := f -> x |--- f| - y |--- f|
\ dy  /     \ dx  /
F(sin(x*y));
2             2
x  cos(x y) - y  cos(x y)
```

It is also possible to index a procedure. There is an appropriate syntax. At the end, one should not forget to assign the procedure to a table. Here, F simply returns its indices.

```restart;
`index/F` := proc (idx) return idx end proc;
F := table(F);
F := TABLE(F, [])
F[i, j, k, 1, 2, 3];
[i, j, k, 1, 2, 3]
```

My question is how to define a procedure that uses both indexed and non-indexed arguments? That is, a procedure that returns a result according inputs of the type:

`F[i, j, k,...](x, y, z,...)`

I need such a syntax to define a differential operator (like the first example) that is further defined as a tensor within the Physics package (Physics:-Define). This differential operator thus needs to be indexed.

## About the loop statement in the embeded components...

Hi, there! I came across a problem that needs your help. When I added the following codes in the "Click action" (I'm not sure if it is this name, My Maple version is not English), it returns the error: "too many levels of recursion". Please help me out. The codes are

```if elenum = 1 then     faultcom := theDiagnosis[1][1][1][1];     faultloc := theDiagnosis[1][1][1][2]; else     for numi from 1 to elenum do         faultcom := faultcom union theDiagnosis[1][1][i][1];         faultloc := faultloc union theDiagnosis[1][1][i][2];     end do; end if;```

## Find intersection of two equations by using Maple ...

Plot the two curves defined by

−x* y^2+4 *x=5

and

(1/3)*x^3+y^2=1

and find the number of intersections of these curves in the square

Help me out.

Cheers.

This is what I typed in the Maple and only got 1 answer...but the answer should be 4..

eqn1:=−x* y^2+4 *x=5
eqn2:=(1/3)*x^3+y^2=1;

sol:=fsolve({eqn1,eqn2},{x=-10..10,y=-10..10});
{x = 1.324605526, y = -0.4746486082}

## How do I solve the question involving Maple notati...

To answer this question you need to create a Maple function using Maple's arrow (->) notation.

Your function should take a Maple list of complex numbers as its input and return the largest modulus from that list.

Enter your function in the box below.

Really need help

Cheers.

## How to enter programming code?...

Hello,

I'm new as to write programs in Maple.

My problem is: How can i write program code into an empty worksheet?

How can i insert new commands into an existing program/procedure?

What do i have to do?

Volker