That depends on whether you have to pass some tests, or not, and whether TI-89 is allowed for using on the tests. Generally speaking, the calculators in the USA still exist only because of that.

Maple on Mac traditionally had problems related to the fact that the classic interface (preferred by many) was not available on Mac. What is the current situation I don't know.

If you have some plans for your undergraduate studies, you, probably, should check what software, or calculators, are used there for Calculus courses and buy the one that is used.

If I was in your situation, I would use SAGE - and it is free.

The standard recommendation for Maple books is the manuals that come with Maple.

Alec

The first 5 equations say that (x,y)[i] for i=1..5 are 5 points on a unit circle. The circle has various parametrizations, such as x=cos(t), y=sin(t), or a rational parametrization, say x=(1-t^2)/(1+t^2), y=2*t/(1+t^2). Using any of them, we get only 5 equations instead of 10, and with 5 variables instead of 10.

Alec

There is a theory that starting from Maple 6, even numbered versions are beta, and odd-numbered versions are alpha. For example, Maple 6 - beta, Maple 7 - alpha, Maple 8 - beta etc. From this point of view, it may be a good idea to upgrade to Maple 12.

Alec

Use

plot(C, 0 .. 5);

or

plot('C(x)', x=0 .. 5);

Alec

That may depend on the constants. You may try to substitute some values for the constants, then find symbolic solution using solve (solving for t), then plot the result (as a function of Cs) and see from the plot, either t is decreasing or increasing.

Alec

y=a+bx are the only polynomial  solutions.

Look at it that way. If y is a polynomial of degree <3, then y'''=0, so the lhs is 0. So the r.h.s. should be also 0. That gives the solution y=a+bx.

If y is a polynomial of degree n>=3, the l.h.s is a polynomial of degree

(n-1)+(n-3) = 2n-4,

and the r.h.s. is a polynomial of degree n-2. That gives an equation

2n-4 = n-2,

from which n=2 that contradicts to n being >=3.

Alec

I posted some suggestions in that thread.

Alec

It may be normal, if similar problems, but with less parameters run for, say, 1 hour, 4 hours, and 8 hours, and you could estimate the run time for large problems from that.

Otherwise, it is not normal.

In general, if a problem runs for more than 2-3 hours, I would try to use Compiler:-Compile to speed it up, or use something different than Maple.

Alec

Complex in Fortran is complex[4] in Maple. And complex[8] in Maple correspond to complex*8 in Fortran. The types should match.

Alec

I don't think that that can be solved in Maple, except few obvious cases.

Alec

Statistics:-Histogram or Statistics:-FrequencyPlot with frequencyscale=absolute.

Alec

I think, it was in the FAQ located somewhere at the Maplesoft site.

Maple evaluates the arguments of the most of functions (once). In this example, it evaluates f(t) which doesn't have sense if t is a name. To prevent that, people usually either use a functional notation, like f, or add single quotes, such as 'f(t)' - then after a single evaluation it becomes f(t), without quotes, and everything works as it was meant.

Alec

Usually, it is not practical. Those procedures which can be translated, can be written directly in C using a very similar semantics.

Compiler:-Compile, on the other hand, is a very nice thing, but it serves a different purpose.

Alec

What command is causing crashing? it is not clear from MapleNet.

Also, I cannot copy and paste from MapleNet. It would be easier if you just posted your commands (without output) in plain text here, so that they could be copied and pasted into Maple.

Alec

I agree with Axel that it would be much easier in the Classic interface with 1D-input, preferably posted on this site in plain text, so that it could be copied and pasted into Maple instead of retyping. Maybe, 2d-input looks nicer for somebody, but it is impossible to use it by copying and pasting from MapleNet. I started retyping it, but it took long time and I didn't finish it. I can't distinguish from the screen whether it is i, or j, or something else.

The loop with the product could, probably, be replaced with a single product command.

Alec