I'm assuming that you have a one-dimensional set of data (a set of real numbers). Then simply compute the mean mu and standard deviation sigma of the data. Then the best fit is Normal(mu, sigma). For the mean, use Statistics:-Mean, and for the standard deviation, use Statistics:-StandardDeviation.

If you have a two-dimensional set of data (a set of pairs of real numbers), let me know.

This will handle most cases, including negative, fractional, decimal, and symbolic exponents and expressions that don't contain the variable.

power:= (E::algebraic, t::name)-> simplify(t*diff(expand(ln(E)),t)):

Example of use:

power(0.5*t^5*r^(-1)*V, t);

     5

Stylistically it's better to define a procedure that takes an expression and a variable rather than one that just takes an expression. It'll give you much more flexibility later on.

Any function can be made inert by prepending a % to the name. The inert function can be converted its non-inert form by value. This is exactly analogous to Int being the inert form of int. 

Any function foo(...) can be made to prettyprint as something else by defining a procedure `print/foo`. This only affects the way that expressions containing the function prettyprint; it doesn't affect the lprint of those expressions, nor does it change their values.

Putting these two ideas together leads, in my opinion, to a more-elegant solution to your problem:

Download Inert_pi.mw

I didn't need to use %pi and pi to do the above; it would've worked had I used %foo and foo. Thus we don't have to rely on the fact that Pi has another expression, pi, that ordinarily prints the same---a fact that is somewhat idiosyncratic to Pi.

By the way, the reason that subs gave you an error message is that r was an expression sequence, not a list. So it looked to subs as if you were passing it four arguments, which would only be valid if the first three were equations. I find expression sequences dangerous to work with and almost always convert them to lists.

Note that most of your code didn't appear in your Question. So I can't answer your first question. Try uploading code with the green uparrow tool, which is the last tool on the second row of the toolbar in the MaplePrimes editor.

Regarding your question about display: This command is in the package plots, so you either need to refer to it as plots:-display or issue the command with(plots).

As I believe you've already figured out, the problem is a small amount of noise in the x-coordinates: They're not all exactly equal to 1. That's because first it computes 1/cos(t) in polar coordinates and then multiplies that by [cos(t), sin(t)] to get the [x,y] coordinate for display.

Consider the following procedural parametric plot in Cartesian coordinates, which is symbolically equivalent to the given polar plot:

plot([1, tan, 0..Pi/3]);

It produces the expected plot of a vertical line segment. Now consider this procedural parametric plot, which is computationally equivalent to the given polar plot:

plot([
     proc(t) local r,x; r:= 1/cos(t); x:= r*cos(t) end proc,
     proc(t) local r,y; r:= 1/cos(t); y:= r*sin(t) end proc,
     0..Pi/3
]);

It produces a plot identical to the "junk" plot.

Without specifying a viewing range for the x-coordinate, I think that this bug would be extremely difficult to fix, if it is even to be considered a bug. What if someone wanted a plot that showed the small variations in x?

Use the save and read commands. See ?save and ?read.

You need to use the value command so that solve can "look inside" the inert Sums. The value command converts inert functions into their active forms.

solve(
     value(simplify(syssub) union {simplify(f[1](0))=2, simplify(f[2](0))=1}),
     {a[0][1], a[0][2], a[1][1], a[1][2], a[2][1], a[2][2]}
);

I had to retype your code, which I hate doing. In the future, please post code in plaintext form and/or include an uploaded worksheet. You can upload worksheets by using the green uparrow tool that is the last item on the second row of the toolbar in the MaplePrimes editor.

The functions' names are f[i], so that is what should appear on the left of the assignment operator.

N:= 3:
for i from 1 to 2 do
     f[i]:= unapply(a[0][i]+Sum(a[j][i]*t, j= 1..N), t)
od;

The command unapply turns an expression into a procedure (or function). It works better than -> in this case because you want i to be evaluated at the time the function is defined rather than the time it is called. The function calls should be made as f[1](0), not f(0)[1].

You simply need to apply the combine command to the result of diff.

w:= x-> Sum(a[j]*x^j, j= 0..infinity);

(By the way, note the preferred syntax for defining a function: w:= x-> ..., rather than w(x):= ....)

diff(w(x), x);

combine(%);

If you declare a Units environment (such as Standard) and give your unknown variable y appropriate units, then the solve will work:

restart:
with(Units:-Standard):
Q:= 20*Unit('m')^3/Unit('s');
I__e:= 0.2e-1;
B:= 2*Unit('m');
k:= 0.3e-2*Unit('m');
g := 9.82*Unit('m')/Unit('s')^2;
M:= 8.1*g^(1/2)/k^(1/6); #Manning's number
Y:= y*Unit('m');
A:= Y*B;
R:= Y*B/(B+2*Y);
V:= M*R^(2/3)*sqrt(I__e);
y__0:= solve(Q = V*A, y);

Do not worry about the datatype issue: It is somewhat misleading, although the error message is true. The source of the error is that dsolve is generating symbolic expressions when it is expecting numeric expressions. It looks like your variable U has not been defined. Certainly it has no definition in the code that you provided. Also, it looks like you are trying to use linalg[grad], but you have referred to it as simply grad. Since linalg is deprecated, you should replace grad with VectorCalculus:-Gradient.

This operation is common enough that there's a single command for it: icontent.

In your initial conditions, ics, you use lowercase f. In the rest of your system, you use uppercase F.

I can't see your original list of strings, but I assume it's something like

L:= ["z", "d", "i", "p", "s", "y"];

If that is so, then do

map(convert, L, symbol);

Another option (not necessarily better than the above) for combining two lists is zip:

`+`(zip((x,y)-> x*ln(y), X, Y)[]);
or, better yet,
`+`(zip(`*`, X, ln~(Y))[])

In Maple 2015, make that

add(zip((x,y)-> x*ln(y), X, Y));
or, better yet,
add(zip(`*`, X, ln~(Y)));