Carl Love

Carl Love

18378 Reputation

24 Badges

7 years, 301 days
Mt Laurel, New Jersey, United States
My name was formerly Carl Devore.

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by Carl Love

@Umang Varshney 

Axel suggested that you do substitutions and then use fsolve, not solve.

@666 jvbasha @tomleslie

The problem with changing ax is that the endpoints of the solution interval depend on it. Thus, the solution for one value of ax will not be accepted as even an approximate solution for another value of ax.

@gawati2611 Your header says "Maple 2020", but I guess that's not true. You need to change this:

PolygonAsLines:= (P::list([numeric,numeric]))->
local t, k;
    plot(
        [seq([((P[k+1]-~P[k])*~t +~ P[k])[], t= 0..1], k= 1..nops(P)-1)],
        _rest
    )
:

to this:

PolygonAsLines:= proc(P::list([numeric,numeric]))
local t, k;
    plot(
        [seq([((P[k+1]-~P[k])*~t +~ P[k])[], t= 0..1], k= 1..nops(P)-1)],
        _rest
    )
end proc:

 

@janhardo Assuming that the package is freely distributable, without copyright issues, could you post a link to it?

The fact that the read command didn't give any errors is a very good sign. It's possible that you won't be able to use the with command for this, but that's not a major obstacle. Did help pages come with the package?

Note that Maple has a substantial LinearAlgebra package already, and even a Student:-LinearAlgebra.

@Anthrazit Unfortunately MaplePrimes doesn't correctly attach files with .maple extension. Can you make it a .zip file and upload it again?

So, what happens if you do

read lampstart;

after executing the script that you showed?

I think that you need to post the full code, because the following simple example works for me:

A:= <<10*Unit(m)>>:
B:= <<20*Unit(m)>>:
A+B;

This works for me regardless of whether I load a Units package.

@Carl Love Please see the last line that I added to the Answer about ToInert,

@Joe Riel You said that "Maple has a decent programming language." Is there a feature in any other language that you think is better? One thing that I'd add is the ability to set the precedence of neutral operators, but I don't know if any other language has that.

@Carl Love Does the above Answer do what you want?

@Carl Love The way that you worded the Question made it seem as if the dice were distinguishable---that there's a "first" die and a "second" die, possibly with different spot distributions. In that case, my Answer stands as is. However, Kitonum's Answer made me realize that your implication that they were distinguishable (by saying "the second") was perhaps unintentional. If that's the case, you could use

Implies(Or(And(d1::even, d2::odd), And(d1::odd, d2::even)), d1+d2 <= 9);

In either case, the purpose of my Answer, as per your request, is to generate an inert expression that prettyprints in standard logical notation; its purpose, unlike Kitonum's procedure, is not to evaluate the truth of that expression.

I haven't worked on your problem simply because I don't like its input format. I know (from your emails) that you've read my extensive Post on boundary layer flow problems, "Numerically solving BVPs that have many parameters", and that the output (plots) that you want are very similar to my output in that Post. Please download the worksheet attached to that Post. Following my format, edit the beginning of that worksheet to use your ODEs, parameters, and boundary conditions. Do this using the Maple Input (1D input) like I have used. If you don't use that format, I won't read it.

Then enter into that worksheet the specifications for the output that you currently have in your attached .docx file. You can enter these into ordinary text fields. Then upload the edited worksheet to this thread.

If you need to discuss anything, please put it in this thread rather than sending me email.

@nm I wonder why your simplify doesn't cancel the 2 in the second term. Mine does.

@Carl Love My procedure above places the denominator of a numeric fraction coefficient in the numerator, which probably isn't wanted. Here's an updated procedure that handles them:

Apparent_Numer_Denom:= proc(e::`*`)
local F,R,N,D;
    (F,R):= selectremove(type, e, fraction); 
    (D,N):= selectremove(type, R, anything^negative);
    (numer(F)*N, denom(F)/D)
end proc:

Apparent_Numer_Denom(expr2); #Acer's expr2

 

@Anthrazit Applying evalb to the condition in an if statement is superfluous; it's done automatically.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Last Page 5 of 533