that in Kip Thorne's book Maple is mentioned through out ?

Kip Thorne and Roger Blandford : "Modern Classical Physics: Optics, Fluids, Plasmas, Elasticity, Relativity, and Statistical Physics"

also, courtesy of Caltech in Chapter 24

restart;
alias(u = u(x, z, t), f = f(x, z, t));
                              u, f
u := (f+sqrt(R))*exp(I*R*x);
                    /     (1/2)\           
                    \f + R     / exp(I R x)
pde1 := I*(diff(u, z))+diff(u, x, x)+diff(u, t, t)+u*abs(u)*abs(u)-(u*abs(u)*abs(u))*abs(u)*abs(u);
    / d   \              / d  / d   \\           
  I |--- f| exp(I R x) + |--- |--- f|| exp(I R x)
    \ dz  /              \ dx \ dx  //           

           / d   \                /     (1/2)\  2           
     + 2 I |--- f| R exp(I R x) - \f + R     / R  exp(I R x)
           \ dx  /                                          

       / d  / d   \\           
     + |--- |--- f|| exp(I R x)
       \ dt \ dt  //           

                                                            2
       /     (1/2)\                           2 |     (1/2)| 
     + \f + R     / exp(I R x) (exp(-Im(R x)))  |f + R     | 

                                                            4
       /     (1/2)\                           4 |     (1/2)| 
     - \f + R     / exp(I R x) (exp(-Im(R x)))  |f + R     | 

simplify(%);
         / d   \              / d  / d   \\           
       I |--- f| exp(I R x) + |--- |--- f|| exp(I R x)
         \ dz  /              \ dx \ dx  //           

                / d   \                 2             
          + 2 I |--- f| R exp(I R x) - R  exp(I R x) f
                \ dx  /                               

             (5/2)              / d  / d   \\           
          - R      exp(I R x) + |--- |--- f|| exp(I R x)
                                \ dt \ dt  //           

                                               2  
                                   |     (1/2)|   
          + exp(I R x - 2 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  f

                                               2       
                                   |     (1/2)|   (1/2)
          + exp(I R x - 2 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  R     

                                               4  
                                   |     (1/2)|   
          - exp(I R x - 4 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  f

                                               4       
                                   |     (1/2)|   (1/2)
          - exp(I R x - 4 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  R     
collect(%, exp(I*R*x));
  /  (5/2)       / d   \      2       / d   \   / d  / d   \\
  |-R      + 2 I |--- f| R - R  f + I |--- f| + |--- |--- f||
  \              \ dx  /              \ dz  /   \ dx \ dx  //

       / d  / d   \\\           
     + |--- |--- f||| exp(I R x)
       \ dt \ dt  ///           

                                          2  
                              |     (1/2)|   
     + exp(I R x - 2 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  f

                                          2       
                              |     (1/2)|   (1/2)
     + exp(I R x - 2 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  R     

                                          4  
                              |     (1/2)|   
     - exp(I R x - 4 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  f

                                          4       
                              |     (1/2)|   (1/2)
     - exp(I R x - 4 Im(R x)) |f + R     |  R     
 

Hi Dears

I need some random zero-dimensional binomial ideals (20 ideals or more) with two, three, or four ... generators with 4 variables atmost. Then I want to regenerate each of them such that some of their generators are not binomial and the obtained ideals are equal to the first corresponding original binomial ideals. How can do I this automatically?

As a simple example let I be an ideal generated by {x-1, y-1, z-1} which is zero-dim. We can obtain J=<x-z, x+z-2, y+z-2> that is equal to I.

Thank you in advance.

Dear all

I have the following code that  compute a parameter labeled by A. 

I used some input vectors and my aim is to get A <1 

A_less_than_one.mw

I tried to change some values of input vectors but unfortunattely I can not have A<1 

Maybe I have a mistake in the code or something else 

Thank you for your help 

I have a very simple procedure that I wrote to get information for an inequality using data from two lists, upon which I can create a pointplot . Now I know people will see what I have done and probably cringe, and believe me I do as well. I know it is not efficient and there is probably a numerous number of ways to do it better but my procedural skills for Maple are lacking. 

From my file you will see what I am attempting to do,nonetheless I will mention it here. I have two lists X,W. for each value in X I want to fine the value in W that yields F(X,L)<G(X,L) where F(X,L) is a complicated integral that I have to evalute numerically, I have tried using unapply as outline in https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/229070-How-Can-I-Speed-Up-This-Numerical-Integral it however only made my problem worse. For small lists it seems to be reasonable but for larger precision it is not the useful. I have looked through the ?do help page and some other resources but to no avail. From what I have seen though I believe I should be using the until command in do but I can't figure it out with having two lists. 

Any help,tips or tricks will be greatly appreciated.

NumericScale.mw

When I try to enter units using the units palette Maple Flow 2023.1 will erase the numerical value entered. That never happened before in previous releases of Maple Flow. No problem if you enter the units yourself, the problem is when you use the units palette. What is going on? A couple of weeks ago I also posted a question about not beeing able to enter an equal sign when entering a math expression in a text region. Agai, this never happened before in previous releases of Maple Flow. What is happening? Am I doing something wrong?

Here is a symmetric matrix with three real parameters (`k__1`, `k__2`, and `k__3`).

mm:=<0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,k__3-1/2,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0,1-2*k__3,0,-1/\
2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,1,0,\
k__3,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0,k__3-1,0,-1/2,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__1,0,0,0,0\
|0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,1-4*k__3,0,k__3-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,(1-k\
__2)/2,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0\
,0,0,0,k__3-1,0,1-4*k__3,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1/2\
,0,(1-k__2)/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,-\
1/2,0,k__3-1,0,-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__1,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0,k__3,0,1,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0,0,\
0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0,k__3,0\
,k__1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0\
|0,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__2,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1/2,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,0,1-2*k__3,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1/2,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0|\
0,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,0,k__2,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__1,0,k__3,0,-2*k__3,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0|0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,(1-k__2)/2,0,1-2*k__\
3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-4*k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k_\
_3-1,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,-2*k__3,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,0,\
0,0|0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
k__3-1/2,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0\
,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,(1-k__2)/2,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1\
/2,0,1-4*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
|0,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1/2,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,1,0,k__3-1/2,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,k__3-1,0,k__3-1/2,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1-4*k\
__3,0,(1-k__2)/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0|0,0,1-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,0,-k__1+5*k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,k__3-1/2,0,k__2,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,k__3-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,(\
1-k__2)/2,0,1-4*k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0|0,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,1-2*k__3,0,k__3-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0,k__3\
-1/2,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,-1/2,0,1-2*\
k__3,0,k__1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3-1,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\
0,-2*k__3,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,k__1,0,1-2*k__3,0,-1/2,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,k__3-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-2*k__3,0,0,0\
,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1/\
2,0,-2*k__3,0,-1/2,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,k__3,0,k__3,0,0,0,0,0,0\
,1,0|0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0>#assuming'real':
cc:={evalindets}(LinearAlgebra:-IsDefinite(mm,query='positive_semidefinite'),`and`,op):

As the title says, I hope to find some values satisfying andseq('cc') (so `mm` becomes positive semidefinite). Unfortunately, these don't work: 

# SMTLIB:-Satisfy(cc);
Optimization:-Maximize(0, cc, initialpoint = eval({k__ || (1 .. 3)} =~ 'rand(-2e1 .. 2e1)'()));
Error, (in Optimization:-NLPSolve) no feasible point found for the nonlinear constraints
timelimit(1e2, RealDomain:-solve(cc, [k__ || (1 .. 3)](*, 'maxsols' = 1*)));
Error, (in RegularChains:-SemiAlgebraicSetTools:-CylindricalAlgebraicDecompose) time expired

 Is there a way to do so as accurately (and precisely) as possible?

Hi

Is there any command to compute the Gauss-Jordan form and the Inverse of a Matrix simultaneously?

Thank you in advance

Sincerely

Since I began to use Maple for teaching back in 2014 (now on 2023 version), the following happens to some students. 

While they are in math mode, the Maple engine suddenly stops being unable to do anything (even 2+2). Only way to solve this is to start a new document or restart Maple. I have seen this issue on both Mac and PC version. 

So my question is what causes this? 

For example, if a plot is generated and then changed with the manipulator, if !!! (execute entire worksheet) is pressed, I would like to signal Maple not to re-execute this specific command (or excecution group)--leave the plot as it is. This also would be useful if a Tutor is used and it returns a series of steps (after user i/o), it may be somehow marked so that this command line not to re-execute at a later date. Simply using the comment out symbol (#), of course, prevents re-execute but the previous result is removed.

Thank you for any info.

I am trying to draw this pictures in LaTeX, then I need to find their parametric equations. How can I get them?
 

Hi to All!

I have an equation including 6 parameters; k_1, k_2, k_3, l_1, l_2, l_3 and a constant a_1. I want to solve this equation for l_1, l_2, and l_3. I get a solution as can be seen in the link but I wonder if there is a solution such that l_j is written in terms of k_j and a_1, j=1,2,3. I mean can be put a restriction on a parameter such that it depends to specific parameters?

Thank you in advance.

Regards,

question.mw

How can I import my data from my Ms word document to a Maple work sheet. Iam finding it difficult to save my work as a Dat file. Something like this example below

Data:=readdata("c:/Users/kokoge00/Desktop/methods.dat",float,10);
Data := [[0.1, 0.0769540597, 0.1477783335, 0.1393069312, 

  0.0763361154, 0.1477867626, 0.1393072151, 0.0763361266, 

  0.1477867830, 0.1393071934], [0.3, 0.1093424148, 0.1120401102, 

  0.1509302274, 0.1072278404, 0.1121142033, 0.1509369166, 

  0.1072278479, 0.1121142168, 0.1509369024], [0.5, 0.1392030568, 

  0.0853083077, 0.1558066181, 0.1353291378, 0.0855066806, 

  0.1558355785, 0.1353291558, 0.08550671332, 0.1558355439], [0.7, 

  0.1662374563, 0.0652194693, 0.1562235596, 0.1604342222, 

  0.0655908735, 0.1562974878, 0.1604342352, 0.06559089617, 

  0.1562974637], [0.9, 0.1903821623, 0.0500537619, 0.1537887672, 

  0.1825594352, 0.0506356391, 0.1539346707, 0.1825594528, 

  0.05063567192, 0.1539346352], [1.1, 0.2117168860, 0.0385555127, 

  0.1496220815, 0.2018541863, 0.0393727175, 0.1498707561, 

  0.2018542024, 0.03937274753, 0.1498707234], [1.3, 0.2303874000, 

  0.0298096396, 0.1444864012, 0.2185409755, 0.0308687065, 

  0.1448804021, 0.2185409880, 0.03086872986, 0.1448803765], [1.5, 

  0.2465077820, 0.0231661161, 0.1388614678, 0.2328759081, 

  0.0244336214, 0.1394893808, 0.2328759200, 0.02443364533, 

  0.1394893543]]
 

How can we manage them?

During the last few days
@Rana47 https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/236758-HPM-Error-Invalid-Input
@SHIVAS https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/236755-How-To-Run-Or-Implement-HPM-Method-In-Maple
@Madhukesh J K https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/236747-Error-In-The-Program-HPM

have both asked a similar question on the same topic (HPM) and uploaded both quite the same code (same name of variables, same commands and same syntax errors).
This reveals an obvious close proximity of these three OP.

Given the extreme resemblance of the three threads, my guess is that there is a single person behind those three login names who expects that asking the same question from different login names will prevent the moderators from moving the new thread to an old one, and thus keeping his question in the foreground?

Am I on the wrong track (in which case I humbly ask the three OPs to excuse my words^[1])
If not, how can we prevent this type of behaviour?

^[1] but, as it is likely that they are then close colleagues from the same lab they should coordinate not to ask the same question three times.

Why does Maple 2023.x not evaluate to Phi := -b in the following example?

> restart:
> z:=-a*exp(-I*b):
> Phi:=simplify(evalc(argument(z)));
               Phi := arctan(a sin(b), -a cos(b))

Since Maple forms the main value of arctan(y, x), would have to be
Phi=arctan(a sin(b), -a cos(b))=arctan((a sin(b))/(-a cos(b)))=arctan(-tan(b))=-b.

Is the full evaluation not implemented for some reason or what did I miss?