So, would Maple need a sort of artificial intelligence that "knows in advance" what is the context to make it work?

To what extent is the verification of trigonometrical identities limited by the undecidability of the zero equivalence?

What developments would be required to make such a list feasible? (computational representation of mathematics?, artificial intelligence?, ...)

Though the Input format help page linked below the edit box is not very explicit in regards to the <maple> tag, and there is in this section:

compose tips | input formats: | * Filtered HTML: Allows use of and tags to enter 2D math here for help

a link to Page Not Found, my understanding of the (basics of the) mecanism is as follows: Everything inside maple tags is sent to a sever running Maple that takes this as input, parses and executes it in the regular way (hence the terminator), its 2D output is converted to gif and sent to my browser from another server (I have to allow this option in my browser, otherwise I do not get 2D pretty-printed math). Surely details are missing. Probably an additional step of parsing.

Though the Input format help page linked below the edit box is not very explicit in regards to the <maple> tag, and there is in this section:

compose tips | input formats: | * Filtered HTML: Allows use of and tags to enter 2D math here for help

a link to Page Not Found, my understanding of the (basics of the) mecanism is as follows: Everything inside maple tags is sent to a sever running Maple that takes this as input, parses and executes it in the regular way (hence the terminator), its 2D output is converted to gif and sent to my browser from another server (I have to allow this option in my browser, otherwise I do not get 2D pretty-printed math). Surely details are missing. Probably an additional step of parsing.

I think that it is very needed a clear guide about posting 2D-math tricks, with a visible link near the top so that we can browse in case of problems or doubt. Until things work seamlessly... Alejandro

I think that it is very needed a clear guide about posting 2D-math tricks, with a visible link near the top so that we can browse in case of problems or doubt. Until things work seamlessly... Alejandro

I think that the maple tags are designed for enclosing input. This way it works: L := [ Matrix([[0,1],[1,0]]), Matrix([[1,1],[1,0]]), Matrix([[0,1],[1,0]]) ];

I think that the maple tags are designed for enclosing input. This way it works: L := [ Matrix([[0,1],[1,0]]), Matrix([[1,1],[1,0]]), Matrix([[0,1],[1,0]]) ];

I think that the issue with design is not about crippling, but about not mixing usage levels. It is OK that there is data structure manipulation tools so that hackers can do whatever they want with them. But, they should be clearly separated from tools for mathematical consistent transformations. At present, 'eval' is a bit of both, and this is confusing. On the other hand, available "mathematical" tools are too limited. For instance 'algsubs' should need much improvements as something as simple as algsubs(sqrt(x)+sqrt(z)=2,f); in your example does not work (if not 'algsubs' because its development is frozen, it should be replaced with something better).

It seems that what is common is not common. In particular, your current convention is quite uncommon for me. It is not clear for me either, which is the divide. After this article in Wikipedia, that is the northamerican (ie US) convention, and the rest of the world uses the other one. On the other hand, Robert Israel in this thread argues that:

Physicists almost always (I think) use phi for the longitude and theta for colatitude, mathematicians do it the other way around.

. I cannot say about mathematicians, but in regards to physicists I have the same impression (textbooks and papers that I can check right now seem to show that).

It seems that what is common is not common. In particular, your current convention is quite uncommon for me. It is not clear for me either, which is the divide. After this article in Wikipedia, that is the northamerican (ie US) convention, and the rest of the world uses the other one. On the other hand, Robert Israel in this thread argues that:

Physicists almost always (I think) use phi for the longitude and theta for colatitude, mathematicians do it the other way around.

. I cannot say about mathematicians, but in regards to physicists I have the same impression (textbooks and papers that I can check right now seem to show that).

Executing the command INTERFACE_WORKSHEET(display,file="file">); within a Standard worksheet opens the worksheet "file" in a new tab. It remains to be seen how to use it from outside. Or may be that you have found a solution already.

Yes, in fact I have played with Theorist twelve years ago and I had forgotten completely about it. In particular, I was not aware that it is still alive (with such an intricate story though). Thank you for remind me about it and the link. On the other hand I do not know much about "theorem proving" software but it sounds to me that its convergence with CAS is something that should occur in the future.

Yes, in fact I have played with Theorist twelve years ago and I had forgotten completely about it. In particular, I was not aware that it is still alive (with such an intricate story though). Thank you for remind me about it and the link. On the other hand I do not know much about "theorem proving" software but it sounds to me that its convergence with CAS is something that should occur in the future.