Maple 2025 Questions and Posts

These are Posts and Questions associated with the product, Maple 2025

We have just released updates to Maple and MapleSim.

Maple 2025.2 improvements include fixes to print layout, PDF export, tooltips for keyboard shortcuts, Plot Builder, and more. We recommend that all Maple 2025 users install this update. This update is available through Tools>Check for Updates in Maple, and is also available from the Maple 2025.2 download page, where you can find more details.

At the same time, we have also released an update to MapleSim, which includes enhanced tools for comparing models and analyzing simulation data, and improved runtime performance for MapleSim connectors.You can find more information on the MapleSim 2025.2 download page.

When working with units in Maple, There seem to be a glitch. Can someone explain, where there might be a mistake here: Sorry for the language, but You will hopefully understand.

In the attached document (an excerpt from a larger document) is a call to the interactive plotbuilder.
The call is somewhere hidden in a document block but the document block with the redline is empty. Deleting the document block only moves the red line to another block. 

Executing the entire document (with !!!) starts the plot builder, execution step by step (with !) does not.

How to delete the call to the plotbuilder?

Interactive_plotbuilder.mw

I am working in Maple 2025:

I executed the following code:

restart:
p:=int(x ** 3 + 2 * x, x);

Maple replied with:

(x^2 + 2)^2/4

I was expecting :

x^4/4+x^2

Did Maple do this integration incorrectly?

Hello! I have a simple system of linear ODEs and I am trying to solve them much like the above link ODEs were solved but I keep getting a pesky problem and no matter what I do, I can't seem to make Maple happy! Could someone take a look & see what I am doing wrong.

Thank you.

Download SimpleMarsEntryAndAeroBrakingModel.mw

Dear sir here not matching the table values in the given pdf and if the Bc ((D(D(f)))(1) = 0) is also not satisfying 

thin_film_base_paper_comparision.mw

restart;
with(PDEtools):
with(plots):
with(LinearAlgebra):

A1 := 1:

# A2: Density coefficient
A2 := 1:

# A3: Thermal conductivity coefficient (Maxwell model)
A3 := 1:

# A4: Heat capacity coefficient  
A4 := 1:

# A5: Electrical conductivity coefficient (Maxwell model)
A5 := 1:
 

 

# Default parameter values (can be varied in studies)
M := 0:               # Magnetic field parameter
               # Unsteadiness parameter  
lambda_val := 0.5:      # Film thickness parameter (β²)
R := 0:               # Radiation parameter
A_star := 0.5:          # Heat source parameter
B_star := 0.5:          # Heat sink parameter
Ec := 0:              # Eckert number
Pr := 1:            # Prandtl number

OdeSys := A1 * diff(f(eta), eta, eta, eta) +
                     A2 * lambda_val * (f(eta) * diff(f(eta), eta, eta) -
                     diff(f(eta), eta)^2 - S * diff(f(eta), eta) -
                     (S * eta/2) * diff(f(eta), eta, eta)) -
                     M * A5 * diff(f(eta), eta) = 0,(A3 + (4/3)*R) * diff(theta(eta), eta, eta) -
                   Pr * A4 * lambda_val * ((S/2) * (3*theta(eta) + eta*diff(theta(eta), eta)) +
                   2*diff(f(eta), eta)*theta(eta) - f(eta)*diff(theta(eta), eta)) +
                   lambda_val * (B_star * theta(eta) + A_star * diff(f(eta), eta)) = 0;

diff(diff(diff(f(eta), eta), eta), eta)+.5*f(eta)*(diff(diff(f(eta), eta), eta))-.5*(diff(f(eta), eta))^2-.5*S*(diff(f(eta), eta))-.2500000000*S*eta*(diff(diff(f(eta), eta), eta)) = 0, diff(diff(theta(eta), eta), eta)-.2500000000*S*(3*theta(eta)+eta*(diff(theta(eta), eta)))-1.0*(diff(f(eta), eta))*theta(eta)+.5*f(eta)*(diff(theta(eta), eta))+.25*theta(eta)+.25*(diff(f(eta), eta)) = 0

(1)

 

# Boundary conditions
    Cond :=f(0) = 0, D(f)(0) = 1, theta(0) = 1, f(1) = S/2,  D(theta)(1) = 0:
#(D(D(f)))(1) = 0:

SVals := [1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6,1.8]:



for j to numelems(SVals) do
  
        Ans[j] := dsolve(eval([OdeSys, Cond], S = SVals[j]), numeric,
                         output = listprocedure):
end do:
       

interface(rtablesize = 100); interface(displayprecision = 6); Matrix([[Y, Nu, Nu, Nu, Nu, Nu], seq([k, seq([-(eval(diff(theta(eta), eta), Ans[j]))(k)][], j = 1 .. numelems(SVals))], k = 0)]); interface(rtablesize = 10); interface(displayprecision = -1)

Matrix(%id = 36893490264274272116)

(2)
 

 

Download thin_film_base_paper_comparision.mw
fin_base_paper.pdf

Why are characters printed with additional back ticks when decimal HTML code is used (see output (3) below). lprint((3)) does not print them.

Looks like an exception. Is there a reason for that? Can it be used for something?

With HTML entitiy

`‰`

`‰`

(1)

With HTML hex code

`‰`

`‰`

(2)

With HTML decimal code

`‰`

`‰`

(3)
 

 

Download back_ticks_with_decimal_code.mw

I am finding many problems using overload in OOP.

But for starter, here is a basic one that does not use Object. Will make separate question for other issues once I figure this basic one out.

I have overload with two procs.

First proc takes 2 arguments of type string, and the second proc one argument also of type string.

When calling the overloaded proc with one argument or two arguments, it always calls the first one which takes 2 arguments.

It never calls the second, even though the call is using one argument only. It always matchs the first proc.

It seems Maple just checks if the first argument match and stops.

I also made sure to use $ for end of arguments flag.

Now when changing the order and putting as the first proc the one that take one argument and the second proc which takes two arguments, now it works. Maple calls the correct proc based on the number of arguments.

How could this be possible? Is order of procs in overload important?? How does one then figure the correct order. It should be based on match of signature of proc, not the order. i.e. match made based on number and type of arguments. 

Is there a way to make the first one work as is without having to worry about order? Or Am I making mistake somewhere?

restart;

interface(version);

`Standard Worksheet Interface, Maple 2025.1, Linux, June 12 2025 Build ID 1932578`

restart;

set_name :=overload(
        [     
            proc(first_name::string,last_name::string,$) option overload;
                print("in proc which takes two arguments");
            end,
       
            proc(the_name::string,$) option overload;
                 print("in proc which takes one argument");
            end          
        ]
    ):

set_name("me"); #why this call the first proc and not the second?

"in proc which takes two arguments"

set_name("me","joe");

"in proc which takes two arguments"

restart;

#change order of procs in list
set_name :=overload(
        [            
            proc(the_name::string,$) option overload;
                 print("in proc which takes one argument");
            end,      

            proc(first_name::string,last_name::string,$) option overload;
                print("in proc which takes two arguments");
            end       
        ]
    ):

set_name("me");

"in proc which takes one argument"

set_name("me","joe");

"in proc which takes two arguments"

 

 

Download why_order_makes_differenence_in_overload_nov_1_2025.mw

For instance, I would like to represent “3^(1/3)” and “4^(1/4)” respectively as elements of the field generated by “3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1)”. 
I think the Algebraic package and the evala procedure should already offer a direct command, but I couldn't find it. The following results are computed by SymPy's `to_number_field` function: 

-48/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^5 + 
 213/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^4 - 
 52/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^3 - 
 174/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^2 - 
 232/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1)) + 
 277/151: # originally computed by SymPy's `to_number_field`
is(3^(1/3) = %);
                              true

48/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^5 - 
 213/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^4 + 
 52/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^3 + 
 174/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1))^2 + 
 987/755*(3^(1/3) + 2^(1/2) + 1^(1/1)) - 
 428/151: # originally computed by SymPy's `to_number_field`
is(4^(1/4) = %);
                              true

Does there exist a direct command in Maple to find the above representations? 

Has anyone had any success in turning off the scrollable matrix feature on Mac? I found the post

 https://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/238061-How-To-Disable-The-New-Scrollable-Matrices

and tried to follow the steps outlined by Acer, but I cannot get it to work. Specifically, I greated a preference file at the location:

 //Users/$USER/Library/Preferences/Maple/<version>/Maple preferences which has the statement 

ScrollableMathTableOutput=false

Any success stories, or tips, will be greatly appreciated. 

Thanks. 

Although several similar problems were asked many years ago (see, e.g., the section “Formal linear algebra” here), there appears to be no new progress so far. It is said that such functionalities exists in the Physics package, but I cannot find any corresponding examples. 
In short, can Maple at present calculate these examples in terms of symbolic array constructs completely automatically?

In Maple 2025.1, why don't all the hotkeys show up when I press the Alt key?

Maple 2025.0 is OK,but update to 2025.1 all the hotkeys don't show up when I press the Alt key.Why?

Hello Maple Community,

I'm working on solving a PDE system for fluid flow in an L-shaped cavity (similar to previous work on H-shaped and square domains ) recently asked by some one here. I've implemented the governing equations in Maple but need help generating contour plots.

I'm attaching:
1. My Maple worksheet l_shape_cavity.mw
2. A PDF with the problem description and equations L_shape_cavity_work.pdf

The main issues I'm facing are:
- Setting up proper boundary conditions for the L-shaped domain
- Generating contour plots for velocity and pressure fields
- Ensuring the solution converges properly

Could you please help me with:
1. Correct implementation of the L-shaped domain geometry
2. Generating proper contour plots
3. Any suggestions for improving the numerical solution

Thank you for your assistance!

In Maple 2025 we are having problems with units.

In Maple 2024 we did not see same errors. Maple sheets working with Maple 2024 does not run in Maple 2025.

In Maple 2025, some units which are f.x. obviously 'J' is not recognices as 'J'.

In Maple 2025, part of units dissapears from expressions.

Just an example; the function v(t) below has correct units m/s, but when using simplify, the unit is changes to m

The Maple file: Error_with_units.mw

Solving an ode, dsolve says it used exact method and gives two solutions as result (correct result).

But when asking dsolve to solve same ode but now specifying that it uses exact method (i.e. same one it used itself before), now it gives one solution only, not two as before.

Why is that? Should not both commands give same result? i.e. two solutions?

interface(version);

`Standard Worksheet Interface, Maple 2025.1, Linux, June 12 2025 Build ID 1932578`

SupportTools:-Version()

`The Customer Support Updates version in the MapleCloud is 29 and is the same as the version installed in this computer, created June 23, 2025, 10:25 hours Eastern Time.`

Physics:-Version()

`The "Physics Updates" version in the MapleCloud is 1881 and is the same as the version installed in this computer, created 2025, October 7, 16:4 hours Pacific Time.`

restart;

ode:=3*y(x)^3*x^2+y(x)^4+(3*x^3*y(x)^2+y(x)^4+4*x*y(x)^3)*diff(y(x),x) = 0;
DEtools:-odeadvisor(ode);
infolevel[dsolve]:=5:

3*y(x)^3*x^2+y(x)^4+(3*x^3*y(x)^2+y(x)^4+4*x*y(x)^3)*(diff(y(x), x)) = 0

[_exact, _rational]

sol:=dsolve(ode); #gives two solutions

Classification methods on request

Methods to be used are: [exact]

----------------------------

* Tackling ODE using method: exact

--- Trying classification methods ---

trying exact

<- exact successful

y(x) = 0, x*y(x)^4+x^3*y(x)^3+(1/5)*y(x)^5+c__1 = 0

maple_sol:=dsolve(ode,[exact]);  #why y=0 solution do not show here??

Classification methods on request

Methods to be used are: [exact]

----------------------------

* Tackling ODE using method: exact

--- Trying classification methods ---

trying exact

<- exact successful

x*y(x)^4+x^3*y(x)^3+(1/5)*y(x)^5+c__1 = 0

sol:=dsolve(ode); #gives two solutions again

Classification methods on request

Methods to be used are: [exact]

----------------------------

* Tackling ODE using method: exact

--- Trying classification methods ---

trying exact

<- exact successful

y(x) = 0, x*y(x)^4+x^3*y(x)^3+(1/5)*y(x)^5+c__1 = 0

 

 

Download why_different_solutions_maple_2025_1_oct_22_2025.mw

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Last Page 4 of 15