@mehdibaghaee Your supposition that computations can generally be "shared" is false. Most cannot. That is true both in Maple and elsewhere.

Suppose that you buy a garage containing 10 cars, each of which can go 100mph.  That won't provide you with a way to go anywhere you want at more than 100mph (and, of course, not at 1000mph either).

What is the justification behind your expectation that a general computation (which may only be computable with some steps done in serial) be able to use 100% of the resources of a multi-core CPU?

@Christopher2222 

Using MS-Word like that also seems to introduce carriage-return into the end-of-line characters on each line. That's a common MS-Windows effect which seems like an unnecessary if mostly harmless alteration.

But I agree, it's nice know that Maple alone can sometimes recover all the Input. Unfortunately we are still seeing the occasional report from a Danish student where either use of Danish language or use of large drawing canvas corrupts the worksheet in such a way that only manual editing can attain the maximal recovery of material.

In fact it's only the last Output that presents the GUI a problem in this case, hence my first upload.

Why didn't you make the free upgrade from Maple 18.00 to 18.02?

@Christopher2222 That was not my point.

Any call like :-diff(...) is always possible as a way to use the global diff command.

My point was that the user may not be expecting the full set of command-name rebindings due to loading the whole Physics package. For most users in most situations, it would be more prudent to either:

• load only the one command via with(Physics, diff) 
• use the export with its full explicit name Physics:-diff(...) 

@Christopher2222 I expect that less surprises would occur from not loading the whole Physics package, and simply calling it as,

Physics:-diff(...);

where, of course, the arguments are filled in appropriately.

@waseem Please read my comments carefully, at least once.

@dharr Yes, evalf(D[...](...)) is a hook into fdiff .

Download pdsolve_mapleprime_ac.mw

@waseem What your latest image shows is not possible purely as a single, combined, plotting structure. There would always be a border around the upper text, if added as a textplot in a row either on top or below.

If you display only your original P1 then you can right-click within the border of the Table that gets shown, and manually set its caption to some centered plaintext. But that does not allow for typeset Greek letters, as far as I know.

There are ways to generate programmatically a GUI Table with the desired look, but you wouldn't be able to export it as a single graphic. And that wouldn't be possible in Maple 13 (you'd need Maple 2015 at least I think).

Another possibility is to manually insert a GUI Table from the menubar. Give it 2 rows and 1 column. Copy and paste the array-plot output from the original display(P1) call into the lower row. Add the desired mixex text&math to the upper row, and center it. With the cursor in the upper row, right-click and toggle off all its exterior and interior border. Now you have a single GUI Table that contains all you wanted. You can even remove the original output. Like this:

table_row.mw

@waseem How about this,

restart:
with(plots):

h:=z->1-(delta2/2)*(1 + cos(2*(Pi/L1)*(z - d1 - L1))):
K1:=((4/h(z)^4)-(sin(alpha)/Gamma2)-h(z)^2+Nb*h(z)^4):
lambda:=unapply(Int(K1,z=0..1), Gamma2):
L1:=0.2:
d1:=0.2:
alpha:=Pi/6:
P1:=( Vector[row]
( [ seq
   ( display(
         textplot([0.065,4.5,typeset("Effect of ",''`α`''=3,",",
                                     ''`Γ`''=Gamma2," in the flow")]),
         plot
         ( [ seq
              ( eval(lambda(Gamma2), Nb=j),
                j in [0.1,0.2,0.3]
              )
            ],
            delta2=0.02..0.1,
            legend=[Nb=0.1,Nb=0.2,Nb=0.3],
            labels=[typeset(`δ1`), typeset(conjugate(`Δp`))]
            #,title=typeset("Effect of ", ''alpha'', " when ", Gamma,"2=", Gamma2)
          ) ),
          Gamma2 in [10,20,30]
        )
      ]
    )
  ):

display(P1);

@brian bovril It seemed to me that Rfun gets weird for larger CPC values, while Cfun produces more reasonable values.

@adel-00 Please don't ask the same question twice.

Please don't repeat the Question, just because you haven't received a satisfactory answer.

If you have followup comments and specific details about what you'd like to accomplish with such noncommutative operators, then please add them here in Comments.

(It's possible that the Physics package might allow some progress.)

How would you want to handle supplying the constant to appear in the range of integration, depending on f?

You can write an extension procedure, which gets picked up by convert(...,Int) .  Eg,

showstat(`convert/Int/from`[invfourier]);

@student_md 

Kitonum is using the parametric calling sequence of the plot3d command, where each of the three entries is a procedure (of two parameters).  The names of the parameters of the procedures are just dummy names. You could label them "y" and "t" or what you wish, no?

You asked for a particular meaning, ie, "In 3D plot, the axis must be ( y, t, X(t)*sin(y) )". So how are the meaning for the two parameters not understood?

Please put your followup queries here, rather than as new Questions.