Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
-- What tests have been run?
-- Quantitatively, how good was the agreement with analytical
results?
-- Are these tests designed to be incisive? What classes
of bugs are they likely to detect? Are they appropriate to
the numerical methods IP is actually using?
-- What are the /limits/ of validity?
-- How do we know that IP did not simply incorporate the
analytic solution for simple cases? (That's what I would
have done.) Doesn't that mean that the results for non-
simple cases will be incomparably less accurate?
1) I do not have answers to all these questions. But I am probably not
the only teacher to compare answers to various textbook problems with
results of simulations. I did this many times and I was never
disappointed. That was the basis for my statement.
2) Do you agree, John, that the definition of stability of a rigid body
(a wooden cone on a table or an airplane in moving fluid) is not the
same concept as stability of motion of only two or three stars
interacting with 1/r^2 forces? What is your definition of stability of
motion of such particles in otherwise empty space?