@Amaterasu It is not the right view of bounty, it should just seem as a advertisement
@Amaterasu You should consider to write a short answer. It would be useful for someone come up in the future.
For the question of whether it is useful to someone, not only to physics.SE, you should consider the people get redirect to that question through search engine in the future, I mean in few years.
@Amaterasu It just means that there is not enough people with the same interest of you participe here. Even though the Earth Science is open, the same thing can happen and get closed. Many beta site follow the same path. There is no reason, just people don't want to participate
I've got 3 figures in my Numerical Methods section all done by it: the common discrete grid (showing x_i, x_{i+1}, x_{i-1}, x_{i-1/2}, x_{i+1/2} etc), the slope limiting, and my radiative loss curve
Mostly because the fuel surface is random every time you make it, so it generates some cool things. But it also makes it annoying when your figure changes every time you recompile the paper...
Task
Show off your best scientific illustration !
The main purpose of this question is to share beautiful scientific pictures, preferably with an educational aspect.
Content
Your post must contain a nice picture and the associated code. One can post several pictures, but it must be done in...
@tpg2114 huh, even with decorations in the library list? That's odd. It shouldn't. (unless you have a very old or very very very new version of TikZ, perhaps)
A lot of people install TeXLive manually, even if their Linux distribution already includes a TeX distribution, because it's really useful to stay close to the bleeding edge for LaTeX packages
2^12 is 4096 people that can be uniquely identified with 12 questions... I think it's reasonable that Tycho Brahe is one of the 4096 most famous characters in history.
What are the options I have, to revert a community edit? I don't want to simply edit my question; I was looking for something similar to a roll-back option where the approvers are notified that I wish to reject their proposed edits.
I might be missing out on some obvious existing way to do it bu...
While this link may NOT answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. — Dimensio1n01 min ago
Hello in Mark Davenports book visitors from time he talks of slowing time to go to the past and future. Does this sound like I'm understanding the theory right?
@jinawee The edit seems valid. I think the improve button is the most appropriate in such situations where the added content is correct but the edit as a whole is not good.
So how can you go tr Abel around a simgularity point come back to earth and be I the future I know the gravity slows time but does moving around a place of huge gravitational pull / density have any part of it ? Could u be still for. X time around he simgularity and then return to ear hand be the same place I. He cuture
Gravitational time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers differently situated from gravitational masses, in regions of different gravitational potential. The lower the gravitational potential (the closer the clock is to the source of gravitation), the more slowly time passes. Albert Einstein originally predicted this effect in his theory of relativity and it has since been confirmed by tests of general relativity.
This has been demonstrated by noting that atomic clocks at differing altitudes (and thus different gravitational potential)...
Yes, being near a gravitational sink will decrease time as compared to someone not near the gravitational sink.
I would like to run some simple simulations of scattering of wavepackets off of simple potentials in one dimension.
Are there simple ways to numerically solve the one-dimensional TDSE for a single particle? I know that, in general, trying to use naïve approaches to integrate partial differential...
@DavidZ I have mixed feelings about it. If it were a reference-request I might actually be more okay with it staying, but it's asking for answers to give the numerical method which makes me think it's off-topic
Although interesting and directly applicable to physicists. I would actually be okay with relaxing computational policies to allow numerical-method questions provided it's not implementation questions
So rather than "help me write the code" it's things like "how does X scheme work for this equation," kind of like we would for experimental physics "why does Ramen scattering allow us to see X"
But I do know that in the theoretical/experimental/computational physics world, computational things are third class citizens
Yeah... I guess that makes sense. I dunno. It's been sitting in the flag queue for a while, just on the cusp of having a consensus in favor of migration.
@tpg2114 this is true.
user54412
Another angle to consider, though: why step on the toes of the struggling SciComp site? There are a number of people there who really know their stuff, and these questions are decidedly on-topic for them.
I think by the policy, it is off-topic. But I don't like the policy really because I think that's a perfect example of a computational physics question that should be allowed here
user54412
11:15 PM
@DavidZ Well, I agree it is currently off-topic for us. I was more referencing the notion of changing the policy to allow some such questions.
Since none of us computational people are up in arms over the computational-physics policy, it's probably okay.
user54412
@tpg2114 I think it's a great question (though when it comes to the Schroedinger equation, the answer is generall "no"), but two of the bullet points are stability and performance, which any non-physicist computational scientist can address, whereas most physicists couldn't
user54412
11:17 PM
That said, though, I don't really have a strong opinion on this
The solution to everything on SciComp is "Use petsc" which is annoying
@ChrisWhite Yeah, but physicists are more directly using the schemes and have experience with it. I mean, a mathematician can give me the textbook answer on stability for MacCormacks predictor-corrector method but actually using it for Navier-Stokes isn't so text book
Those are things that only people who really do it are going to know
user54412
@tpg2114 Very true. Honestly my thesis can be summed up as "figuring out the trivial details left out by mathematicians"
So, in our GTR paper today, I spied the schwarzschild metric. I was all happy, and assumed the question to be a really interesting and awesome one. I left it for the last because I wanted to finish up the easy ones so I could relax and work on this one. Turns out all we had to do was calculate the length of a vector (the crux of the question was in knowing that what was asked for entailed calculating a length)
The course is awesome, but I keep having really high expectations for it :P