Timeline for Writing a solution dependent coefficient in a PDE using Do & Table command
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2021 at 9:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 13, 2021 at 8:06 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 13, 2020 at 8:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 16, 2020 at 7:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jun 16, 2020 at 6:29 | answer | added | user21 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 9, 2020 at 7:36 | comment | added | xzczd♦ |
"writing the loop and applying epsilon at any time step is desirable" Why? What you want to do will be done by NDSolve automatically.
|
|
| Jun 9, 2020 at 7:15 | comment | added | Mohammed | I tried item 1 once, but writing the loop and applying epsilon at any time step is desirable. But in the second case, you are right, and I will correct it. | |
| Jun 9, 2020 at 6:52 | comment | added | xzczd♦ |
Seems that you have some misunderstanding for the basic design of Mathematica. 1. Why not simply Clear[ϵ]; ϵ[x_]=0.01*u[x,t] ? 2. {t, 0, t0, 0.001} is obviously wrong, {t, 0, t0} is the correct one.
|
|
| Jun 9, 2020 at 6:51 | review | First posts | |||
| Jun 9, 2020 at 13:57 | |||||
| Jun 9, 2020 at 6:46 | history | asked | Mohammed | CC BY-SA 4.0 |