mmmm... are you talking about linearization of the system? you can do whatever you want, you can know a lot. you are not answering the problem of "phisically relevant". you are just pushing problems with your belly.
Spalding solutions for turbulence took years to reach a consensus and vary with the type of flow.
In all honesty, i didn't even mentioned modelling. it still fails hard in so many ways. plenty of others followed, with numerical problems, representation problems or even "what constant is this, has anyone used this code against a flow around a tree" problems.
regardless, i made you a question you don't seem to want to answer anyway. bc proving you are a real programmer comes first!
Spalding solutions for turbulence took years to reach a consensus and vary with the type of flow.
In all honesty, i didn't even mentioned modelling. it still fails hard in so many ways. plenty of others followed, with numerical problems, representation problems or even "what constant is this, has anyone used this code against a flow around a tree" problems.
regardless, i made you a question you don't seem to want to answer anyway. bc proving you are a real programmer comes first!
Pheyniex wrote:
mmmm... are you talking about linearization of the system? you can do whatever you want, you can know a lot. you are not answering the problem of "phisically relevant". you are just pushing problems with your belly.
Spalding solutions for turbulence took years to reach a consensus and vary with the type of flow.
In all honesty, i didn't even mentioned modelling. it still fails hard in so many ways. plenty of others followed, with numerical problems, representation problems or even "what constant is this, has anyone used this code against a flow around a tree" problems.
regardless, i made you a question you don't seem to want to answer anyway. bc proving you are a real programmer comes first!
I don't even recall what your original question was. Besides I've been dealing with physics and mathematics here rather than programming.
Also, I was talking about this: the Lagrangian Method for solving Finite Element problems. It splits up the problem in a finite number of particles to solve specific equations.
You need to log in before commenting.
atoms, space in between molecules, etc. doesn't really fit the concept of continuum...
i did ask for the states of the particles, so if you want to apply any d/dx, d/dy, d/dz quantity on it you will discover you really can't, since the derivative implies a continuous domain and, in fact particles don't make up such.
You can, in fact, model this. It's called the Langragian Method, one of the prime methods to solve differential equations in Discrete Mathematics.