@PatrickT The smoothness of the Postscript export does make the source of the problem seem to be something more akin to pixelation than to, say, numerical instability. I noticed that the problem was still there upon export to JPEG, which usually has a smoothing and blurring effect. Would someone who has a printer please print the original "jagged and nasty" plot?

Isn't that just the derivative with respect to x?

Download diffdiff.mw

Would someone who works for Maplesoft please comment on this?

• Is Maple IDE an officially sanctioned Maplesoft product?
• If it isn't, why are you letting them get away with abusing your trademarks?

@spradlig I use Classic to open very old .mws worksheets. All I do is open them and resave them, and then I can open them in Standard. That's all that I use Classic for. However, I can think of two other reasons why someone might want Classic. The first is that the spacing of the characters in the math output of Standard is often too wide or misaligned vertically. Thus it is harder to read. The second reason is that moderately long output that Classic can display virtually instantaneously can take inordinately long to display in Standard, and very long output very often causes the GUI to crash completely.

@spradlig I use Classic to open very old .mws worksheets. All I do is open them and resave them, and then I can open them in Standard. That's all that I use Classic for. However, I can think of two other reasons why someone might want Classic. The first is that the spacing of the characters in the math output of Standard is often too wide or misaligned vertically. Thus it is harder to read. The second reason is that moderately long output that Classic can display virtually instantaneously can take inordinately long to display in Standard, and very long output very often causes the GUI to crash completely.

Several times I have had a complete loss of kernel soon after receiving this error. So, I don't think it can be so safely ignored.

Several times I have had a complete loss of kernel soon after receiving this error. So, I don't think it can be so safely ignored.

And remember to click Apply Globally at the end.

And remember to click Apply Globally at the end.

@sakhan To get all the nonlinear terms at once, first get the linear terms and the constant terms and subtract from the original. What's left is the nonlinear terms.

@sakhan To get all the nonlinear terms at once, first get the linear terms and the constant terms and subtract from the original. What's left is the nonlinear terms.

Nice. So your degree 9 polynomial is of the form f(x^3) where f is degree 3, hence it is solvable.

@User7843 Markiyan's answer shows that it is not pixelation. And, yes, I noticed the absence of any improvemnet with varying the thickness. I wonder what is going on that causes this. Markiyan, you probably have an idea.

Whoever gave me a vote up for this answer should take it away.

@User7843 Markiyan's answer shows that it is not pixelation. And, yes, I noticed the absence of any improvemnet with varying the thickness. I wonder what is going on that causes this. Markiyan, you probably have an idea.

Whoever gave me a vote up for this answer should take it away.

@sakhan

You wrote:

I may be wrong but I think getting all the integrals is easy, we just need to do
seq( op(i, lhs(eq10_1), i=1..nops(lhs(eq10_1));

You're missing a right parenthesis after the first 10_1. But, putting that in, that command will only give you the terms, not the integrals within the terms. Indeed that command is equivalent to simply op(lhs(eq10_1));

If you want the terms that have a[j] to the 1st power, and do not have a[j+1] or a[j+1/2], then do

coeff(coeff(coeff(lhs(eq10_1), a[j], 1), a[j+1], 0), a[j+1/2], 0);

Likewise, for any exponents m, n, k, the terms for a[j]^m*a[j+1]^n*a[j+1/2]^k can be extracted by

coeff(coeff(coeff(lhs(eq10_1), a[j], m), a[j+1], n), a[j+1/2], k);

Does that do what you want?