9 years, 93 days

## I am using Maple 2016...

@tomleslie Maple 2016

## this code does not seem to work for me...

@Alger  I get an empty output when i enter this command or code.

## Nice solution. What does int~ mean...

Thanks for the reply. I am curious about this command " int~ ". I can't find any documentation for it. If I use int(a,t) it says "Error, (in int) wrong number (or type) of arguments: wrong type of integrand passed to indefinite integration."  So I surmise that int~(a,t)  can be used for vector integration. Also i noticed you didnt use any packages.

## I didn't know that....

@rlopez Thanks for the reply. That's an interesting workaround.

As an aside, I was under the impression that maple experts use Maple notation exclusively, or 1d math notation ( with 2d math display output), and frown upon Math mode (that is the 2d notation).

The maple online guides or manuals tend to be written it in maple notation.

## Thankyou. can you explain the logic behi...

Can you explain the logic behind that. Does that mean int is a function that we have to unapply?

For example, a one variable int(x^2,x) = x^3/3 is not a function, but an expression.

But maybe the vector int(<4*t, sin(t),cos(2*t)>, t) is a function of t?

hmm, i have the same problem with one variable

unapply does the trick here as well.

So my question boils down to, why isn't  " v := x->% " equivalent to "v:=unapply(%,x)"

I downloaded the patch maple 2016.2 and as you can see Tautology command is still not working.

@nm Thanks for the prompt reply. Is there a place in maple where you lodge bug reports for the developers, maybe for the next version of it.

This seems to only affect the letter p.  I just checked by manually entering all the letters. Substituting p1 for p for example seems to be a simple enough workaround when doing logic.

## spam?...

"So instead, you'll be much better off in need of an anti-wrinkle skin care system close to Internet.  ...."

Is this spam? Math geeks don't care much for skin care products. Ply your wares elsewhere.

## surd and real numbers...

I just found out about root[] by googling a few minutes ago. Isn't the surd supposed to be used for real numbers? That's why I used it, I wanted to stay to real numbers.

For example  surd(-8,3) gives me 2 , but (-8)^(1/3) does not return 2 because Maple treats it as a complex number.

## the problem came up...

The problem came up when I was asked to compose two functions and determine if the composed function is one to one, onto, or neither.

Full link to the question :

http://s3.amazonaws.com/chegg.media.images/board/904/904d6355-379d-4de3-91e1-0dc8926f99f3-original.png

I defined h(x) = x^4, g(x) = surd(x,8).

I wanted to show that the composition f=h(g(x)) is not onto by showing there is no solution

to h(g(x) = -2.

The root[] command might be better for solving equations than the surd.

Here is a screenshot, with both surd and rational exponents for comparison.

The root[8](x) command gives me the expected response of no solution.

Should I just stick with rational exponents?

It would be nice if Maple would say 'no solution' when there is no result.

Otherwise someone might think their version of Maple is buggy or something.

Also I notice Maple does not simplify exponents by default. For example (x^4)^(1/8) does not become x^(1/2).

One way seems to be to make an assumption.

## @broe I would define new trig funct...

I would define new trig functions by appending the letter d to the default trig functions, which accept degrees as arguments for sin,cos, tan,etc. and output degrees for the inverse trig functions.

sind:=d->sin(Pi/180*d):
cosd:=d->cos(Pi/180*d):
tand:=d->tan(Pi/180*d):
cscd:=d->csc(Pi/180*d):
secd:=d->sec(Pi/180*d):
cotd:=d->cot(Pi/180*d):
arcsind:=y->180/Pi*(arcsin(y)):
arccosd:=x->180/Pi*(arccos(x)):
arctand:=m->180/Pi*(arctan(m)):
arccotd:=a->180/Pi*(arccot(a)):
arcsecd:=b->180/Pi*(arcsec(b)):
arccscd:=c->180/Pi*(arccsc(c)):

To see the result,  https://i.imgur.com/cpxzzMK.png

## Oh I feel so ......

Thanks guys. I didnt realize I forgot the colon when I defined L.

And yes, I meant it to be an ordered list, check f(1) = h(1), then f(2) = h(2), etc.

Let me use different numbers to clear up ambiguity.

I have two sets

f:={8,9,6,7}; h:={8,9,7,6} ; L=seq(i,i=1..4):

for i in L do
if f[i]=h[i] then
print(f[i]);
end if;
end do;

The output should be {8,9}.

So it doesn't make a difference if you use {}  or [ ], when we define f,h.

Can anyone recommend me a maple programming guide, for newbies?