Using library is very easy to plot the graph. But how to do this question by using spacecurve rather than the library

I do not quite understand why prof asks this question. Or I am doing right? Where can I improve? Or I understand this question completely wrong. To be honest, I did not get the point 

Why the least square of my calculation is different from the library. Where I am wrong? And how to plot this graph without the library? just use the function mentioned in the content

Hi,

I am struggling with an issue of the solutions produced by the "fsolve" command for a polynomial with multiple solutions. I am running the commands that are represented as follows:

f := x^2-x+0.25:

fsolve({f=0}, x=0..1);

It produces multiple solutions as follows:

{x = 0.5000000000}, {x = 0.5000000000}

What I am looking for is as follows:

1. Store multiple solutions separately.

2. For each solution, separate the variable "x=" and the numerical value "0.50000000". 

I would appreciate inputs from the team. 

Thank you,

Omkar

# uname -a

Linux p9x79 5.4.0-48-generic #52-Ubuntu SMP Thu Sep 10 10:58:49 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

I use X with TWM.

When minized, the maple icon is about 1/4" diameter.  How do I change this to a larger icon?

Hi, 

I'm trying to calculate the inner product of these two vectors. 

|a> = (1 + i) i, (1) j, (i) k

|b> = (4 - 1) i, (0) j, (2 -2i)k

where bold i, j, k, are the orthonormal bases. 

I can calculate it on paper, the problem I'm having is figuring out how to calculate it using maple. I want to be able to use dirac notation. I've tried using the physics library but none of the example use actual vectors but instead use quantum numbers. 

Thanks, 

Poiseuill's law: the formula is correct if both sides has the same dimension, so it is required that 

     [v]=[(P*R^m*nⁿ)/L]

find n and m that make the above equation dimensionally correct

It might seem like a small thing, but is there a way to separate the text from the numbers? It's only for optical purposes, as i think it looks better. 

Thank you,

MO

When I type the command

sum(2^n, n=0..N)

Maple calculates it correctly. However, if I then go back to that expression and click on it to change the value of N, Maple tries to execute something before I hit enter. It won't stop unless I press the Interrupt button, and after that I have to insert some other calculation, e.g. 1+1, for it to work once again.

This happens even on completely new files and for any explicit values of N.

Why is this happening?

Hello! I am trying to plot a parabola given by the equation x=y^2. I used the following code

plot(y^2, y = -1 .. 1, color = blue, thickness = 3, title = "T1.1 x=y^2 [ECE]")

but my plot looks like this

I want it to have the x-axis horizontally displayed and the y-axis to be vertically displayed. Something like this

Any advice? 

Thank you!

I think I am doing this question right. Is there anything to improve the code? 

How can I get exactly graph plotting as the sample show? All blue area under the curve. 

Download Untitled.mw

When Maple converts sin(x)^n to Latex, the result remain  sin(x)^n.  But in Mathematical typesetting, this is normally written as sin^n(x).   Ofcourse this is only for Latex. In Maple code this not valid.

Is it possible to change Maple's Latex to make it do this automatically? Mathematica does this automatically. Here is an example

restart;
expr:=sin(x)^3+cos(3*x)^5;              
Physics:-Latex(expr)
 
            \sin \left(x \right)^{3}+\cos \left(3 x \right)^{5}

Which when compiled gives

Compare to Latex generated by Mathematica

Which compiles to 

Which is more standard in books and papers, than Maple's version.

Both Maple's Physics:-Latex and latex() command do the same thing.

Is there a way to make it generate the improved version for latex?

Maple 2020.1

sometimes I get intermediate expressions generated from other operations that contain terms such as exp(x)^n in them. As an example, exp(x)^3.  In Mathematica, it automatically replaces these by exp(3*x). But in Maple I need to force this change.

For purposes of Latex only, I like to change these terms to exp(3*x) before converting the whole expression to Latex, as it is looks much better that way.

expr:=exp(x)^3;
Physics:-Latex(expr)

                \left({\rm e}^{x}\right)^{3}

expr:=exp(3*x);
Physics:-Latex(expr)

                {\rm e}^{3 x}

I found that doing simplify(expr,exp)  does the trick. It changes exp(x)^n to exp(n*x). But I am worried about applying this whole simplification command to the whole expression, which can be very large, and do not want to change it all yet.

I just want to change any occurance of exp() there, and nothing more.

I tried using subsindent to do that, but it does not work on terms in denominator

restart;
expr:=exp(x)^3*sin(x)+3/(exp(x)^n);
subsindets(expr,'exp(anything)^anything',f->simplify(f,exp))

I tried

subsindets(expr,'1/exp(anything)^anything',f->simplify(f,exp))

and it did not work.

I am still not good at subsindent. How to make it change all exp(x)^n to exp(n*x) everywhere?

Hello

I need to detect if different expressions contain a radical. For example

aaa := X3*(alpha[2, 8]*(sqrt(X2/alpha[1, 7])*alpha[3, 8] + X1*alpha[3, 6])*X2 + X3*(alpha[2, 8] + alpha[3, 9]/2))/(X2*alpha[2, 8])

As can be noticed there is a square root in the expression.   

I have tried type(expr,sqrt) and has but to no avail. (I am not sure if I use them as they should though).   

Many thanks

Ed