If the equation is a polynomial of degree 6, solve will likely produce solutions involving RootOf's (or if it doesn't,
very complicated solutions involving radicals).  If you want numerical values, fsolve is more useful. For example:

> fsolve(3*z^6 + 2*z^5 + z^4 + 1, z, complex);

-.7943676506-.4530402856*I, -.7943676506+.4530402856*I, -.1346849807-.8583762273*I, -.1346849807+.8583762273*I, .5957192979-.4160497007*I, .5957192979+.4160497007*I

 (the <maple> tag seems to be acting up again)

If the equation is a polynomial of degree 6, solve will likely produce solutions involving RootOf's (or if it doesn't,
very complicated solutions involving radicals).  If you want numerical values, fsolve is more useful. For example:

> fsolve(3*z^6 + 2*z^5 + z^4 + 1, z, complex);

-.7943676506-.4530402856*I, -.7943676506+.4530402856*I, -.1346849807-.8583762273*I, -.1346849807+.8583762273*I, .5957192979-.4160497007*I, .5957192979+.4160497007*I

 (the <maple> tag seems to be acting up again)

Yes, I did.  Thanks for catching that.

Yes, I did.  Thanks for catching that.

In general, worksheet files containing 2D Maple input or output produced by one release may not open successfully in an earlier release, because of changes in format.  However, the Classic worksheet format (.mws rather than .mw) has not changed for several releases, so if you save a file as a Classic worksheet it is much more likely to be accessible from earlier releases.  If you want to stick with the Standard .mw file, try removing any output and using Maple Notation input rather than 2D input.  Alternatively, save procedure definitions in a text file using the save command (or write them with an external editor) and read them using read.  This should be completely portable between releases (except for changes in Maple syntax or new packages and commands).

In general, worksheet files containing 2D Maple input or output produced by one release may not open successfully in an earlier release, because of changes in format.  However, the Classic worksheet format (.mws rather than .mw) has not changed for several releases, so if you save a file as a Classic worksheet it is much more likely to be accessible from earlier releases.  If you want to stick with the Standard .mw file, try removing any output and using Maple Notation input rather than 2D input.  Alternatively, save procedure definitions in a text file using the save command (or write them with an external editor) and read them using read.  This should be completely portable between releases (except for changes in Maple syntax or new packages and commands).

This is just as I said before: specifying range = 0 .. 0.1 means that the range of values for x should be from 0 to 0.1.  So you can get correct results in a graph with x = 0 .. 0.1, but not with x = 0 .. 1.  The fact that the plot command does not catch this as an error is a bug, I think. 

This is just as I said before: specifying range = 0 .. 0.1 means that the range of values for x should be from 0 to 0.1.  So you can get correct results in a graph with x = 0 .. 0.1, but not with x = 0 .. 1.  The fact that the plot command does not catch this as an error is a bug, I think. 

The "Standard" interface is the Java interface.  I think you mean the Classic interface.  Unfortunately it seems that there is very little, if any, development work going on with the Classic interface (which is the interface from Maple 8).  All new interface features are for the Standard interface only.

The "Standard" interface is the Java interface.  I think you mean the Classic interface.  Unfortunately it seems that there is very little, if any, development work going on with the Classic interface (which is the interface from Maple 8).  All new interface features are for the Standard interface only.

What I meant was: since t is specified as the "time" variable, the "range" specified in the pdsolve command is for the other variable, x.
So in order to get values for x = 1, 1 should be included in the range.

Here's what I get.

> PDE := diff(u(x,t),t)+diff(u(x,t),x)=0;  IBC := {u(x,0)=x,u(0,t)=0};

pds := pdsolve(PDE,IBC,numeric,time=t,range=0 .. 1);

pds:-plot3d(t = 0 .. .1, x = 0 .. 1, axes = boxed, orientation = [-110, 60], color = [0, 0, u]);
 

What I meant was: since t is specified as the "time" variable, the "range" specified in the pdsolve command is for the other variable, x.
So in order to get values for x = 1, 1 should be included in the range.

Here's what I get.

> PDE := diff(u(x,t),t)+diff(u(x,t),x)=0;  IBC := {u(x,0)=x,u(0,t)=0};

pds := pdsolve(PDE,IBC,numeric,time=t,range=0 .. 1);

pds:-plot3d(t = 0 .. .1, x = 0 .. 1, axes = boxed, orientation = [-110, 60], color = [0, 0, u]);
 

If 0 < lsf < l1 and C > 0, the inequality lsf*l1/(l1-lsf) < C is equivalent to lsf < l1/(l1 + C).

> implicitplot([B,C],l1=0..10, lsf = 0..3.6*l1/(l1+3.6), grid=[100,100],
     gridrefine=3,crossingrefine=3,colour=[red,blue]);

> implicitplot([B,C], l1=-4..4, lsf=-4..4, gridrefine=3, crossingrefine=2, grid=[100,100], colour=[red,blue], axes=box);

So what's the problem?

B and C are equations involving three variables: l1, lsf and theta[m].  To do an implicitplot, I guess you'll need to give a value to theta[m].  Now, what isn't implicitplot evaluating?