I have contacted Maplesoft support with the intend to send them corrupted Maple.ini files (that caused Maple 2026 installation to malfunction) for further analysis.

Before sending I asked whether they were interested. In the email response support replied that they were happy that my problem has been solved. I replied that they apparently did not understand my first mail. Then I got this back.

Hello,

Thank you for clarifying! I apologize for not being more clear in my response.

The issue with the preferences file (Maple.ini) was summarized in the MaplePrimes links that you provided which have been shared with our R&D team. They will be able to investigate the problem further.

Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best Regards,

XXX(Name removed, Case - 00191471 )
Technical Support Analyst

Apparently I have shared the files already. Not to my knowledge. Without my ini files no one can investigate the case.

For me this answer sounds like an automated AI generated reply. That is not what I expect as a long-time customer and EPM participant (paying full price). Premium products should come with premium support!

In this case I solved the installation problem myself with the help of this forum and wanted to support Maplesoft to make better products. Now I really feel like an idiot. Spending my free time with debugging, offering assistance, talking to a bot(?!?).

Dear upper management and owners:

If you have replaced support staff with bots that do not identify themselves as such, please reconsider what you are doing. Don't squeeze Maple for maximum profit and hide this. Think about your loyal customer base if you have a long-term growth strategy. The value of most companies lies in the people who work for them not in dumb, sloppy working bots. Humans want to deal with competent humans.
And: Do not let AI code Maple. This will lead to sloppy untrustworthy code with definitly more support requests.

MAple 2026.0

Maple 2025.2 craches on SupportTools.-Update()

Can anyone verify? 

Solutions?

FYI: The user interface issues I was having with Maple 2026  have now been resolved.

Documents imported with the AI-assistant can containt private and confidential information.

I was wondering how privacy is handeled by third party AI services that are called by the AI assistant.

From https://openai.com/enterprise-privacy/ it is not clear which product is running and how Maplesoft has set it up.

Anyone knows more?

I use plots:-display(Array([p1,p2])) to make two plots (or more) show side by side in worksheet. The problem with this is that there is no way to control the overall width of the output. 

It always takes the entire width of the worksheet window.  Using size=...  makes no difference. This only changes the size of each plot, but does not change the width of the display. Even when using size= inside the plot itself and not inside the display command, it makes no difference to the overall width of display. 

Here is an example to make things clear (site will not let me upload the worksheet).

Here is code and screen shot

s:=t->2*t^4-30*t^3+135*t^2-120*t-10:
v:=t->diff(s(t),t):
p1:=plot(s(t),t=0..8,'gridlines','thickness'=3,'color'="red",'title'="Plot of s(t)"):
p2:=plot(v(t),t=0..8,'gridlines','thickness'=3,'color'="blue",'title'="Plot of v(t)"):
plots:-display(Array([p1,p2]));

This is too wide. Adding size makes no difference. What size does is change each plot size, but display still is using the whole width of the worksheet which makes it look ugly

plots:-display(Array([p1,p2]),size=[300,300]);

I wanted it to look like this (using paint.exe to move things)

ie. to adjust the overall size of the display.

I can avoid display all together and just do 

[p1,p2];
#or
Array([p1,p2]);

But now each plot becomes too small and do not know how to make it larger, but at least they do not take the whole width of the worksheet

Is there a way to tell display not to use the overall width of the worksheet? say to use 50% of the current width and center the output, like the above example made using paint.exe shows?

Hello Friends.

I have created two piecewise functions: dx(t) and dy(t).  I then converted them to RandomVariables:  DX and DY.  When I try to perform a mathematical operation on the random variables, I get a Dirac function, which is unintended.  When I read about this issue, I learned that flawed (discontinuous) piecewise functions may be the problem.  However, my piecewise functions look ok to me.

Does anyone know why this is happening?  I do expect a lenghty result when I process the random variables, but not a Dirac function.  My code is below:

TriangleEuclidean.mw

I want to give my Tensor a the index i with define (a[i]) , but it is not allowed. Can anybody help ?

thank you !

Could someone please help me understand this

restart;
expr:=(A*x-1 )/x
eval(expr,x=infinity)
    # 0    why?

limit(expr,x=infinity)
   # A correct

How did Maple evaluate expr to zero when x=infinity? What math did it use to obtain this result? Did it may be just saw infinity in denominator and said the whole thing therefore is zero?  But there is infinity in the numerator also and infinity/infinity is not defined.

Maple 2026 and Maple 2025.5 on windows 10

Here is a minor nit regarding combining plots in Maple.

Download mw.mw

I am trying to use the symbol Delta in front of a symbol to denote a change in the variable in Maple 2022.For exmaple Q':=Q+Delta_Q; But I can't figure out how to denote it: Delta_Q does not seem to work as it displays a literal "Delta_Q".

Maple 2026 can't solve this first textbook  ode. Book gives solution in the back which Mathematica gives, but for some strange reason, Maple dsolve can't solve it with the IC given. I also tried Maple 2025, it can't solve it.

ode:=diff(y(x),x)*sin(2*x) = 2*y(x)+2*cos(x); 
ic:=y(1/2*Pi) = 0; 
sol:=dsolve([ode,ic]);

No solution. returns ()

But this is the solution from book which Maple verfies is correct

book_sol:=y(x)=tan(x)-sec(x);
odetest(book_sol,[ode,ic])

gives [0,0]

Here is Mathematica also

Why Maple can't solve it? ofcourse it is not a bug not to be able to solve an ode, but Maple being the best ode solver in the world should have been able to solve it. I've also solved it by hand (it is just a linear first order ode) and got same solution. Maple can solve it without the IC. 

So the issue is in resolving constant of integration using IC is where the problem is.

May be someone could find why Maple can't solve for the constant of integration from the IC. Here is the solution without IC which Maple finds with no problem

ode:=diff(y(x),x)*sin(2*x) = 2*y(x)+2*cos(x); 
sol:=dsolve(ode);

Gabriel’s Horn is one of the most famous examples in calculus of how infinity can behave in ways that completely defy our intuition.

The horn-shaped object is created from a very simple curve: y = 1/x for x ≥ 1 (pictured below).

Now imagine rotating this curve around the x-axis. The resulting surface stretches infinitely far to the right while becoming thinner and thinner. Visually, it resembles a long trumpet or horn that continuously narrows to a thickness of zero.

At first glance, nothing about this shape seems particularly mysterious. As x grows larger, the radius 1/x becomes smaller and smaller. It seems reasonable that both the volume contained inside the horn and the area of its surface would remain finite (or at least if the volume was finite, then the surface area would also be finite). After all, the horn gets extremely thin very quickly.

Calculus allows us to test that intuition.

To compute the volume of the horn, we use the disk method. Each slice perpendicular to the x-axis forms a circular disk of radius r = 1/x, each with an area of π*r² = π*(1/x²).

The total volume is the sum of an infinite number of these disc areas with thickness dx. As an integral,

V = π ∫₁^∞ (1/x²) dx.

This is a simple integral that converges to a value of 1. We could use the power or rule or our favourite computing software (I used Maple below).

Hence, V = π ∫₁^∞ 1/x² dx = π*1 = π. This means the horn contains only π cubic units of space, even though it extends infinitely far. 

Now let’s compute the surface area of the horn. For a surface of revolution, the surface area is

A = 2π ∫₁^∞ y √(1 + (y′)²) dx.

Since y = 1/x, we have y′ = −1/x². Substituting into the formula gives

A = 2π ∫₁^∞ (1/x) √(1 + 1/x⁴) dx.

Software like Maple can easily handle this integral. It tells us the integral diverges to infinity.

However, this is difficult to solve analytically. To understand what happens to this integral, notice that for large x, the square root term is very close to 1, since 1/x⁴ can be approximated as 0 as x grows large. This means the integrand behaves roughly like 1/x (it's actually slightly larger than 1/x). But

∫₁^∞ 1/x dx diverges, and ∫₁^∞ (1/x) √(1 + 1/x⁴) dx > ∫₁^∞ 1/x dx, so ∫₁^∞ (1/x) √(1 + 1/x⁴) dx must also diverge. As a result, the surface area of Gabriel’s Horn is infinite.

This leads to the famous, surprising conclusion:

• The horn has finite volume.
• The horn has infinite surface area.

In other words, it could be filled with a finite amount of paint, but it would require an infinite amount of paint to coat its inside surface.

Of course, real paint has thickness, so the paradox disappears in the physical world. Eventually, the horn would become thinner than the paint layer itself. But mathematically, the result is perfectly consistent.

The key idea lies in how quickly the function 1/x shrinks. The cross-sectional area of the disks scales like (1/x)² = 1/x², and the integral of 1/x² converges.

But the circumference of each slice scales like 1/x, and the integral of 1/x diverges.

So as the horn extends outward, the added volume decreases quickly enough to sum to a finite value, while the added surface area decreases too slowly and accumulates forever.

Gabriel’s Horn beautifully illustrates one of the central themes of calculus: infinite processes can produce results that feel deeply counterintuitive.

Volume and surface area seem closely related, but can behave in completely different ways when infinite limits are involved. A shape can stretch endlessly yet still contain a finite amount of space.

This strange object reminds me that mathematics isn’t just about calculating numbers, but is also about exploring the strange and fascinating consequences of simple ideas pushed to their limits.

According to the help text in Maple 2024.2, a number of classical integral equations can be solved using "intsolve". The Volterra equation of the first kind, with an upper limit of integration x, is of particular interest. A long time ago, I had to solve a similar equation. This one arose from a model of a real-world process, but instead of x, the upper limit of integration was the function y(x), which I had to calculate. I painstakingly solved it to a good approximation. Is there an algorithm in Maple that can at least calculate an approximate solution, or is a numerical solution, e.g., using Ritz, the only option?

edited: I forgot to upload an example

 test.mw

Hi,

I was running Maple 2022.2 on Windows 11 and now I am using Linux Mint. I ran into something today that doesn't work as expected on LM. I thought it did on Windows, but now I am not so sure.

At any rate, I am unable to browse large vectors or matrices with more than 10001 rows. I looked for a setting that lets me change it, but I can't find one. The data is there--I can plot it and export it, but I can't browse it.

Any thoughts? Thanks.

Cheers,

Jno.

There seems to be a regression in Maple 2026 in the XMLTools:-ParseFile function.

As Maple2026 is not yet in the list of products to be chosen, I have added it in the subject.

Error, (in XMLTools:-ParseFile) invalid input: too many and/or wrong type of arguments passed to XMLTools:-NSXML:-Parser:-ParseFile; first unused argument is prolog = true

The test file is right from the help related to ParseFile.
Test_XML.mw

Example: In the expression

expr:=1/sqrt(2)*(x+a);

I prefer the output

over

because it is shorter. To fix that I do

expr:=1/sqrt(2)*(x+a);
subs(sqrt(2) = 2/%sqrt(2), %)

The problem with that way is that all occurences of sqrt(2) are replaced, which I do not want. I only want to replace sqrt(2)/2.

I thought about selecting all products that contain 1/2 and sqrt(2) among others and apply the substitution only there.

How to do this in a (simple?) way?

Maybe there are other ways without subs.