You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to comphys
I see that E2.1(a) is assigned. There's no 2.1(a), though. Did you mean 2.1, or 2.2(a)?
Jay Wang
unread,
Sep 18, 2017, 3:30:17 PM9/18/17
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to comphys
There is a slight difference here between the lecture notes (draft) and the book. If you are referring to the book, it should be E2.2 (a). On the manuscript notes, it is E2.1(a)
CM
unread,
Sep 19, 2017, 3:22:37 PM9/19/17
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to comphys
This question wants us to show second order accuracy, and the equivalence of 2 different RK2 methods. Is it sufficient to demonstrate accuracy and equivalence by numerically solving an ODE? Or are you looking for a traditional proof?
Jay Wang
unread,
Sep 19, 2017, 3:48:36 PM9/19/17
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to comphys
It's asking for an analytic proof. Expand k2 in powers of h, and show that the error is of the order h^3. If you like, you may assume explicit dependence on t of the derivative f(t) to make it easier.
Of course, it'd be complete if you test this to be true numerically too (not required).