@John May 

indeed "Jamie" does look set for the purgatory!

@Alejandro Jakubi 

I agree wholeheartedly with your remarks Alejandro... but still a secret part of me harbours the hope that my comment somehow raises your Maple credit a little.

so is Jamie set for a come back?

@Will 

just a comment -- I don't think you can expect forum users to know the difference between an answer and a comment, I just clicked on "reply to this" and my guess is that most users will do just that. If you've got to move messages around all the time, according to whether you think they're a comment or an answer, you've got a lot of work ahead of you. Plus, what if the message is both a comment and an answer? or a commented answer? or whatever?

@Will 

just a comment -- I don't think you can expect forum users to know the difference between an answer and a comment, I just clicked on "reply to this" and my guess is that most users will do just that. If you've got to move messages around all the time, according to whether you think they're a comment or an answer, you've got a lot of work ahead of you. Plus, what if the message is both a comment and an answer? or a commented answer? or whatever?

@Alejandro Jakubi 

I'm very interested indeed, Alejandro, I've learned a lot of Maple tricks from you in the past. Please do email me the worksheet, same email as before. Would be very grateful indeed.

I'm sorry you're unhappy about the forum update -- I am still a little lost and haven't sampled the forum much since the changes, so I can't comment.

@Alejandro Jakubi 

I'm very interested indeed, Alejandro, I've learned a lot of Maple tricks from you in the past. Please do email me the worksheet, same email as before. Would be very grateful indeed.

I'm sorry you're unhappy about the forum update -- I am still a little lost and haven't sampled the forum much since the changes, so I can't comment.

compare:

int(eval(F(x, y),a=1), x = 0 .. 1);

and:

int(eval(F(x, y),a=2), x = 0 .. 1);

the latter is a sorry mess involving elliptic functions, s apparently a big difference exists between the cases a=1 and a=2, suggesting (I'm guessing) that closed-forms, if they exist, would each be quite specific to each value of "a".

compare:

int(eval(F(x, y),a=1), x = 0 .. 1);

and:

int(eval(F(x, y),a=2), x = 0 .. 1);

the latter is a sorry mess involving elliptic functions, s apparently a big difference exists between the cases a=1 and a=2, suggesting (I'm guessing) that closed-forms, if they exist, would each be quite specific to each value of "a".

@Alejandro Jakubi 

that's a neat trick Alejandro, thanks; I wasn't able to generalize the method though, well at least it has made me more confident that the two expressions are indeed the same, assuming positive real numbers...

@Alejandro Jakubi 

that's a neat trick Alejandro, thanks; I wasn't able to generalize the method though, well at least it has made me more confident that the two expressions are indeed the same, assuming positive real numbers...

@Will 

thanks William for the tip!

I have just tested that if you copy the entire code above, the code will be retrieved, even though only part of it is displayed.

you may find it helpful to look at my maple worksheet

http://patrick.toche.free.fr/research/growth/growth.htm

I find the best way to simulate these saddle-point stable models is to start somewhere like 0.99999*kss and 0.99999*css, where [kss,css] is your steady state, and run time backwards.

you may find it helpful to look at my maple worksheet

http://patrick.toche.free.fr/research/growth/growth.htm

I find the best way to simulate these saddle-point stable models is to start somewhere like 0.99999*kss and 0.99999*css, where [kss,css] is your steady state, and run time backwards.