@nm 

Respecting the user's choice of imaginaryunit is relevant. Independent of that, try with(Physics:-Latex) and you will see all the Usexxx variables that you can assign to produce different kinds of output. Among them there is Latex:-UseImaginaryUnit. If you set it, that is what will be used, not the value set via interface(imaginaryunit). If you change UseImaginaryUnit in the middle of a worksheet after having used Latex, at this point you will need to Latex:-Forget() to clear caches. When the package is ready this is supposed to be handled by a Latex:-Settings command, that manage all the Usexxx variables.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@nm 

It works fine in v.789, and thanks for all the feedback. 

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@michalkvasnicka 

The problem is not in the Maplesoft Physics Updates. The problem is in the installation of MapleCloud packages in the toolbox/2020 directory in the Windows platform. Regarding your question, yes, the Physics Updates - I am referring to the package, not the installer - is tested before being uploaded.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@michalkvasnicka 

Unfortunately, the problem seen in the Windows platform when trying to install the Maplesoft Physics Updates is, generally speaking, something I cannot fix. It is not a Physics package problem, not a Maple library problem. It is a problem with the mechanism to install packages that affect only the Windows OS (probably the one mostly used, I know). I am saying "generally speaking" because past experiences have shown that sometimes it is possible to work around a problem like this with patching libraries. But I also do not use Windows and so have no direct way to reproduce the problem in order to see if a library workaround could work.

I heard, however, that people at Maplesoft taking care of this installer problem are now able to reproduce it, so as other people, I am also looking forward for their fix.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@nm 
Sorry for that, a mistake at night. It is corrected in v.789.

By the way, suppose you install the "latest" Maplesoft Physics Updates, that you can do via Physics:-Version(latest); and you see something went wrong with latest. You can always rewind to any previous version. For example, if latest = 786 you can input restart; Physics:-Version(785); restart; and you are back to the previous version.

Independent of all that: the Latex:-UseColor := false is relevant only when there is some color to be put, for instance in Latex(Int(f(x), x)) the integral sign and differentiatial are to be displayed in gray, and are translated to tex including the instruction to use that color, that in some context is unnecessary or undesired.

PS: I haven't seen your latex_issue_4.mw, where did you post it?

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@nm 
I see. But that is a different issue (your original one was about changing Typesetting settings - by the way: please post different problems in different posts to avoid this situation).

This problem you mention now is not related to Latex. It is instead a subtle problem in the internal routines of solve when `assuming` uses Physics:-Assume, more modern code than the old assume, with more functionality, and a setting that is necessary for other packages to work properly (Physics, Differential Geometry, VectorCalculus, LieAlgebrasOfVectorFields, ...).

While different problem you are mentioning now, not-related-to-Physics-or-Latex, is fixed,

• In the Updates v.781, assuming starts using Physics:-Assume only after you enter "with" Physics or use Physics Export that requires the full setup of Physics. Not when you use Physics:-Latex.
• Or, if you use a previous v.xxx, after loading Physics you can enter Physics:-Setup(assuminguseAsume = false); and that makes `assuming` use the old assume program again, and then for this example you posted solve doesn't have a problem. Unfortunately, doing that can produce some unexpected results since the (very) old assume program redefines global variables in a way that makes several packages fail. Though again this is not related to Physics:-Latex, something that involves no mathematics whatsoever.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@itsme 

It may be that what you want is a subset of what I am working on. If you could present a worksheet (Green arrow) with the most frequent examples showing the issue you have in mind, there may be a way to accommodate things so that the developments are actually a plus for you too.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical functions, Maplesoft

@itsme 

First, the mathematical physics notation you see in the worksheet - I personally find it fantastic and actually programmed some of it - requires the use of special symbols, or additional official CTAN LaTeX packages, in order to be reproduced when you transform that worksheet into a .tex file and from there into a PDF. So the first part of the answer is no, you cannot avoid using "something else", something beyond the bare latex styles. Anyway, I don't see this as a problem: the good and free latex programs nowadays come with all CTAN packages. 

Second, the Maple environments for things that actually exist in the bare latex environments (e.g. paragraph), all of them could in principle be avoided. For example, instead, of having \begin{Maple Normal}, defined within the .sty Maple files as \newenvironment{Maple Normal}{\normalsize\rmfamily\mdseries}{}, one could just not have it: \normalsize \rmfamily \mdseries are actually defaults of the standard LaTeX paragraph style. Adjusting the code only to use standard latex environments, however, might seem easy (would seem for me if I had not seen the code) but actually would require too many changes in the existing code. 

So in summary the answer is: what you ask is complicated. Instead of that, I personally prefer to invest in things that are not implemented in previous releases like the display of equation labels, in the text, the output and also in the input lines, and by all means to have all the mathematical physics notation you see in the worksheet properly translated to tex.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical functions, Maplesoft

@nm 

The \esxxx variables are an old issue. It is fixed in the version under development by translating 1,600 additional symbols, but I cannot post that new maplesymbols.sty file. I will cook a workaround within Physics:-Latex on Monday.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical functions, Maplesoft

@nm 
Just put maplestd2e.sty (actually, all the files you see in the /etc/ directory of your Maple installation) either in the same directory as your paper, or in the directory containing default or user .sty files; check your LaTeX installation - for Windows I recommend MikTex, and on a Mac  I use TexShop.

About turning ON / OFF latex translation settings following Typesetting settings, today I'm winding down; on Monday will try to remember to revise that. The focus at this point is on other sectors, mainly in handling equation labels.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical functions, Maplesoft

@nm 
Thanks to you for your kind comments, others aware of the novelty also started using it, and with that we are having fantastic early feedback. By the way, I dislike to say it but, unfortunately, Physics is work I do alone (but for the invaluable feedback of users of the package), including Latex now. This Physics:-Latex project comprises a myriad of necessary related improvements in the File -> Export -> LaTeX (FEL) facility too, that transforms worksheets into papers. Those FEL improvements, however, are in java and cannot be distributed in the Maplesoft Physics Updates. As usual, please remember that all this Physics Updates is research activity, and as such, all or part of it may or may not be included in subsequent official releases.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

Incidentally, for a couple of weeks, there is a new command, Physics:-Latex, included in the Maplesoft Physics Updates, that is supposed to address the "fractions issue" you are mentioning, as well as several others. The package is not finished, but I understand it already supersedes the user-level latex command, besides providing latex translation to a myriad of new things not translated by latex. Give it a try. I appreciate feedback to improve it, either to physics@maplesoft.com or here, as you prefer.

This new command may replace the old one, or remain as a Physics latex translation that additionally covers the mathematical-physics and differential geometry notation not covered by the old one.

As soon as I have some pending developments finished, I will post here clarifying what the new features (it is a long list) are.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@DoingMath2018 

Writing here not as a Maplesoft employee but as anyone else.

I think there is something beyond cultures that we can all understand: you can express yourself in a way that is not toxic to the reader. I realize that some things can generate anger enough for someone to express herself in aggressive mode, and in such a case some people may prefer to express themselves (instead of saving the stress impact that has in your own body). But expressing angrily basically happens after a conversation-exchange escalates, not the case of your post, where, surprisingly for me, you express yourself very aggressively right away.

The problem with that is that your anger deviates the attention completely from the contents of your post which, content-wise, is a perfectly valid opinion, even one that is partially shared by people who replied here (itsme summarized that well).

So please listen. Not listening is one of the things you are criticizing others. Don't do that. It is not good to express yourself the way you did. You can still rewrite your post removing the anger.

That said, I have comments about the contents, disregarding the toxic angrily envelope. I see the following:

• 2D-Math display issues: you seem to like the idea, but not at all the implementation. I actually have an opinion: I prefer 2D display of input versus 1D display and prefer Worksheet versus Document, as explained in this Mapleprimes reply. And also think that fixing 2D-Math display of input is of the utmost importance. 
• Plots (their display, manipulation or export to PDF / print). I agree with everyone that thinks this is of top importance, and I also agree that we can always learn - or simply raise the bar - by looking at what is implemented in other software, even freeware, when they perform better.
• Documentation: the existence of overlapping pages regarding what to use, or do when you start using Maple. This is by all means very relevant.
• Interface bugs (from cursor flickering to other stuff not mentioned): I personally think that the UI is just the most important part - it is what we use to communicate with the computer.

So, you see, other people also find these topics valid. But then your post has no examples of what you say. I realize you also think providing examples is doing beta testing for free. With due respect, it may be your anger speaking, but we know that is not true.

Providing 1 example for each of the four items above takes you maybe 1 min per example? And suffices to make your points. Moreover, we know, it is always the case that something may have escaped our attention (e.g. discovering that there exists 1D-Math display of input lines and that there exists the Worksheet mode, not just the default Document mode). That 1 example helps with that understanding too (to the benefit of not just you but also everybody reading the thread), and without undoing any of your points.

Finally, unless your post was intended only to offend (which I believe is not the case), no matter the past, you never know about the future, and maybe these examples that you can add to this post (rewritten without anger) can indeed trigger improvements in the UI - in that way turning your time-investment in this post a valuable game-changer.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@nm 

You are changing the question. Your original question was "what is the status of this. Is it true there is now a method to solve all these exactly and may be Maple's implementation is not in yet for this?" The answer to that: false, and Maple has the most advanced algorithms for this problem, including that the algorithms we developed represent the most advanced understanding of this type of ODE (as explained in the previous reply).

Your new question is about the solutions for constant invariant Abel equations. These are the 'directly obtained' solutions for the one you showed:

You realize that by now there are many different algorithms that include, as a subset, the case of Abel equations with constant invariants. It is an easy problem, and it is a pitty (or a shame) that some people claim they can solve "all Abel equations", to then only show how to solve them when the invariants are constant.

Regarding "how" the solutions are obtained (the formulas), most of these algorithms are explained in the odeadvisor help pages, others in papers (see ?dsolve,references) and, in particular for Abel constant invariant (regardless of whether f2 = 0), the first algorithm I saw is in Kamke's book, as explained in the page ?odeadvisor,Abel, quoting from there, first paragraph: "See Differentialgleichungen, by E. Kamke, p. 24"

Edgardo. S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

@vv 

The routines used within the Physics package are all visible as the Physics:-Library, and they all have help page documentation, albeit behind the development, a handful of the 166 commands you see when you with(Physics:-Library) still miss a section in ?Physics:-Library.

So either you were not aware of that, or otherwise, what are you referring to with "implemented in a strange and undocumented manner"?

Also, you say "...the Physics package, where almost everything is redefined." That is inaccurate and can be misleading. In the Physics package, several commands are extended to handle more things. For example, the product operator `*` can handle non-commutative operands, and the `.` operator can handle a myriad of other situations beyond multiplying Matrix and Vector. Similar with diff, that after loading Physics can perform a myriad of differentiations not possible before loading Physics.

Again, all that is documented: there is a help page for, say, Physics:-<diff, `*`, `.`>, where everything is explained (up to what is reasonable; the pages are long).

The most important thing: besides the additional functionality provided by the package, all the results you get before loading Physics - not related to the additional functionality - you also get after loading Physics.

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft