39 Reputation

18 years, 173 days

One thing you could try to do is impleme...

One thing you could try to do is implement the seq command instead of using for loops as this should result in a speed up (there is an example of the benefits of seq in the maple application center I believe).

plots[animate](plot3d,[f,x1=0..5, y1 = 0...

plots[animate](plot3d,[f,x1=0..5, y1 = 0 .. 25], a = 0 .. 1, frames = 100);

the following link leads to a developed maple package for symbolic calculation of fenchel conjugates.

http://oldweb.cecm.sfu.ca/projects/CCA/

This code is from another post that I ca...

This code is from another post that I can't seem to find (i didn't look very hard), however you should be able to use it to do what you want.

L:=rtable([[name,4,3,6,5],[3,5,name],[3,6,1,2,9,8]]):

FindIndices:= proc(A :: rtable, val)
local T;
T := table();
rtable_scanblock(A, [], 'passindex',
proc(x,indx)
if x=val then
T[indx] := NULL;
end if;
end proc
);

indices(T,'nolist');
end proc:

FindIndices( L , name);

FindIndices( L, 3 );

#etc

cheers

-Scott

ToJet, FromJet...

you should look into using the ToJet and FromJet commands.

Regards

-Scott

use mod...

try using 'mod' instead of frem  as 'frem'

Cheers

-Scott

a:=Array(1..10,1..10):
b:=Array(1..10,[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,8]):

a[1,1..10]:=b:

if you use 'D' notation for derivative i...

if you use 'D' notation for derivative its simple :-)

eg

v:=x->x^2+x;

dv:=x->D(v)(x);

dv(1);

dsolve without b.c....

if you solve your ode without b.c., convert the expression to 'exp'  and then impose the b.c. you see that all notrivial solutions get killed off

i.e.

soln:=dsolve( ode );

simplify( convert( soln, exp) );

imposing b.c. imply that  C1 = C2 = 0

simplify...

if you use a combination of symplify(  ,symbolic), expand and simplify you can simplify the expression.

eg try  (for eq1 = your first equation, and eq2 = your 2nd equation)

simplify(expand(simplify(eq1^4, symbolic) / simplify( eq2^4, symbolic)));

which yields 1 ... if you try without  " ^4 " it simplifies it enough to visually see they are the same, however Maple seems to have problems combining powers

sometimes  simplify( sol, symbolic)...

sometimes  simplify( sol, symbolic) and/or simplify( sol, size) will help to clean up the results significantly.

you might be able to use the rifsimp com...

you might be able to use the rifsimp command to simplify the DE and solve

try somthing likerestart:with(LinearAlge...

try somthing like

restart:with(LinearAlgebra):
> w:=<w1,w2,w3>:
> v:=<v1,v2,v3>:
> a:=<a1,a2,a3>:
>
> pt1:=w &x v
> -simplify(( a/norm(a,2) )*norm(w,2)*norm(v,2)*
> sqrt( 1 - b^2*(norm(w,2)^2/norm(v,2)^2)),symbolic);
>
> pt2:=simplify(norm(w,2)^2,symbolic) - omega^2;
>
>solve([pt1[1],pt1[2],pt1[3],pt2],[w1,w2,w3,b]);

If you use the casesplit feature in rifs...

If you use the casesplit feature in rifsimp, it returns a few non-zero cases.  Have you plugged you solution into the equations to check if they are correct?

to integrate it, it should...

to integrate it, it should be something like int(P1, E=K..E0); the only thing that could possible cause some delima's as to the exact soln would be whether K > E0, < E0 or = E0
 Page 1 of 1
﻿