restart;
evalf(Int(cosh(t)/(cosh((17/15)*t)+cosh(t)), t = 0 .. infinity));

5.210624833

evalf(int(cosh(t)/(cosh((17/15)*t)+cosh(t)), t = 0 .. infinity));

2.720144439

I am trying to setup a general metric with the Physics package.  The metric is composed of the Minkowski metric plus the product of two null vectors. Here is the code:

retstart;

with(Physics);

Define(l[mu],eta[mu,nu]);

eta[mu,nu] := rhs(g_[]);

Setup(g[mu,nu]=eta[mu,nu]+l[mu]*l[nu]);

I get the following error:

Error, (in Physics:-Setup) wrong argument: g[mu, nu] = l[mu]*l[nu]+(Matrix(4, 4, {(1, 1) = -1, (1, 2) = 0, (1, 3) = 0, (1, 4) = 0, (2, 2) = -1, (2, 3) = 0, (2, 4) = 0, (3, 3) = -1, (3, 4) = 0, (4, 4) = 1}, storage = triangular[upper], shape = [symmetric]))

My plan is to apply the rule g[~mu,~nu]*l[mu]*l[nu] = 0 and calculate the Christoffel symbols using the metric.

I am trying to use the Physics package because the DifferentialGeometry package seemed focused on Newman-Penrose.  I will not be using NP for the calculations, only a strict calculation of the Einstein field equations from the given metric.

Thank you.

Hi everybody,

In quantum mechanics, I want to draw the wave  of the electron in the hydrogen atom.  So in 3D, you will have a cricle and along the circle, there will be a cosine function that will meet after a full cercle (the standing wave that is possible).  The blue one and the red one at the same time.  But in 3D

The closest that I come to succes is with this commands:

But as you will see, the wave end at the same place as it started.  But instead of going in a cercle, is as a funny shape.

Thank you in advance for you trouble.

--------------------------------------
Mario Lemelin

Maple 18 Ubuntu 13.10 - 64 bits
Maple 18 Win 7 -  64 bits
messagerie : mario.lemelin@cgocable.ca
téléphone :  (819) 376-0987

I have a complicated function that I call on a elements of a list. This function inside calls various other functions and in particular fsolve, which is not thread safe. In order to speed things up I tried using Grid:-Map, but have found a slight drop in performance.

So say a run with map takes 31 seconds, a run with Grid:-Map will take 32 seconds. By looking at the cpu activity, I can tell that only a single core is used at any one time (this is also evident from timing). By looking at the processes, I do see "mserver -gridnode 1/4", etc. present however, so new mserves are certainly spawned - they are just just not used concurrently.

Grid:-NumNodes() gives 4 for my CPU.

Any ideas how to force my code to run on all four nodes??

I am on ubuntu 12.04 x86_64.

thanks.

 ** EDIT **

In case someone finds this useful. Here is a quick-hack that fixes this problem for me.

Look at the current implementation of Grid:-Map with

showstat(Grid:-Map):

Define a new function called say hackMap that is identical to Grid:-Map, except, change the second line from this

     var := `union`(`union`(map(proc (x) op(0,x) end proc,indets(f,function)),indets(f,name)),{'`grid/mapcmd`'});

to this:

     var := {anames('user'), '`grid/mapcmd`'};

now use hackMap as you would Grid:-Map.

It basically forces maple to copy all the 'user' variables over to the new processes. On a machine with 4 nodes i get a ~4 seedup with my particular code.

NOTE: I am not certain that there aren't some side effects as I dont' know all the code behind the scenes, but I seem to get correct results with my particular code.

AOA... There are three question

1. I want to convert exp(Iota*theta) into ternometric function i.e., 

exp(Iota*theta) = cos(theta)+Iota*sin(theta)

Is there any comand pl help...

2. Also i want to rationalize the complex number...

3. I want to seprate real and imaginary parts of a comaplex numbers

I try to sort a polynomial using the graded reverse lexicograpic order. According to the Documentation this is achieved via tdeg.
So here is what i tried:

with(Groebner):
sort( x+y+z, order = tdeg(x,y,z));

or

sort(x+y+z, [x,y,z], tdeg);

In both cases maple returns "x+y+z" instead of the expected "z+y+x". What am i doing wrong?

Hello,

I have to simplify a piecewise function and Maple gets a more complicated solution than needed.




I don't know how to handle this kind of problems with Maple?
I don't understand why Maple doesn't see this?
Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks in advance for your help / advice.


# the code of my example
restart:
Mf(x):=piecewise(x<=L/2,1/2*x*F,x>1/2*L,1/2*x*F-F*(x-1/2*L));
# Make a dimensionless function:
# -    Mf(x):= Mf(xi)*F*L
# -    variable ξ  ( xi:=x/L )
eq[1]:=Mf(xi)*F*L=Mf(x);
Mf(xi):=solve(eq[1],Mf(xi));
Mf(xi):=subs(x=xi*L,Mf(xi));
# F is the Force and L is the Length of the beam:
Mf(xi):=simplify(Mf(xi)) assuming F>0,L>0;
print("When I simplify this function by hand it will be");
Mf(xi):=piecewise(xi<=1/2,1/2*xi,xi>1/2,-1/2*xi+1/2);

Hello, everyone. I faced some promblems on maple. Hope you can help me.

I want to set up the commutation rules like Pauli sigma matrix in Physics Packages,

but failed to get the correct one.

Here is my maple code:

restart;
with(Physics);
Setup(mathematicalnotation = true);

Setup(quantumop = {Q}, algebrarule = {%AntiCommutator(Q[j], Q[k]) = 2*KroneckerDelta[j, k], %Commutator(Q[j], Q[k]) = 2*I*(Sum(LeviCivita[i, k, l]*Q[l], l = 1 .. 3))});

Commutator(Q[1], Q[2]);
                              
AntiCommutator(Q[1], Q[2]);
                              
AntiCommutator(Q[1], Q[1]);
                              
Commutator(Q[1], Q[1]);

In fact, Commutator(Q[1], Q[2]) give a incorrect result 0 while the correct answer is  2*I*Q[3].

Do anyone know how to resolve this?

Hello,

can I remove tick marks from axis in plots ?

Hi,

thank for any  help.

I need you help to make a movies ( animation)  according to the index k=1..10.  k is used in Vect_T[k], vector of time to make an animation of the true solution, and it's also used in Matrix(M[..,..,k]), h

True solution:ow can I make a seq of plots for different value of k. 

plot3d(True_solution(x,y,Vect_T[k]),x=0..a,y=0..b,axes=boxed,grid= [11,11]);

Analytic solution

plots:-matrixplot(Matrix(M[..,..,k]),axes=boxed,tickmarks= [[1="0", 2=" ", 3=" ", 4=" ", 5=".4", 6=" ", 7=" 0.6", 8=" ", 9=".8", 10=" ", 11="1"],[1="0", 2=" ", 3=" ", 4=" ", 5=".4", 6=" ", 7=" 0.6", 8=" ", 9=".8", 10=" ", 11="1"],default],labels=[x,y,u],axes = boxed);

I tried, this:

S:=seq(plots:-matrixplot(Matrix(M[..,..,i]),labels=[x,y,u],axes = boxed),i=1..10):
plots:-display(S);
 But I get only one figure.

 also,

I tried

BoxTrue:=Null;
for k from 1 to 10 do
BoxTrue:=BoxTrue, plot3d(True_solution(x,y,Vector_time[k]),x=0..a,y=0..b,axes=boxed,grid= [11,11]): od:
display(BoxTrue, insequence=true);
also, no display

Given the lagrangian from the pendulum physics example on the help page,

or text format.

L := -sin(omega*t-phi(t))*(diff(phi(t), t))*a*l*m*omega+(1/2)*(diff(phi(t), t))^2*l^2*m+cos(phi(t))*g*l*m

Hi Everybody.

Doing some calculation in quantum mechanics, I stuble on that integral:

I see immediately that the answer is 1/2.  But Maple 18 cannot give an answer other than a limit that he cannot evaluate.  I even try assumption that p and hbar are realcons.  I get infinity.

Any idea?

Thank you in advance for your help.

--------------------------------------
Mario Lemelin

Maple 18 Ubuntu 13.10 - 64 bits
Maple 18 Win 7 -  64 bits
messagerie : mario.lemelin@cgocable.ca
téléphone :  (819) 376-0987

Hello,

Can anyone explain to me why there is a difference between:

f := int((A*sin(omega*t+phi)-B*sin(omega*t))^2, t);

and the expanded version:

f := int((A*sin(omega*t)*cos(phi)+A*cos(omega*t)*sin(phi)-B*sin(omega*t))^2, t);

Thanks

Hi,

Is there any difference between

Matrix(4,5,(K,C)->K+C);

and

Array(1..4,1..5,(K,C)->K+C);

Say if I have a very 'complicated' procedure myfunc(K,C) that takes two options, but it runs all dependently.

Matrix(4,5,(K,C)->myfunc(K,C));

and

Array(1..4,1..5,(K,C)->myfunc(K,C));

Which one is more efficient? The final ouput of each run from myfunc is just a integer value.

The reason I am asking it that i think both runs on a 'single' thread (core) as CPU usage is always very low, around 15-20%.

If I look at the task manager, some cores (threads) arent doing anything.

Is there anyway to speed things up?

Thanks,