Timeline for Solving `Integrate` of `InterpolatingFunction` from an `NDSolve`
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 29 at 15:23 | comment | added | bbgodfrey | If you hope to have readers help you, you should first correct known errors in your code. By the way, you question largely duplicates mathematica.stackexchange.com/q/296808/1063. | |
| Jan 29 at 15:08 | comment | added | Jules Alvarez | @bbgodfrey Thank you, but I am looking for a bigger interval of solution. | |
| Jan 29 at 14:51 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 10 at 3:06 | |||||
| Jan 29 at 14:24 | comment | added | bbgodfrey |
f as computed in your question, is a complicated expression enclosed in curly brackets, in other words it is a List. As a result, using it in NDSolve produces unpredictable results. Use First[f] to correct this problem. With that correction , you will see that NDSolve[{u''[t] == -u[t]*First[f], u[0] == 1/Sqrt[2*k55], u'[0] == -I*k55/(a55*Sqrt[2*k55])}, u[t], {t, 0, 10^-5}] // Flatten produces a rapidly oscillating solution of approximately uniform amplitude near t = 0, as it should.
|
|
| Jan 29 at 5:02 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited tags
|
| Jan 29 at 4:41 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 89 characters in body
|
| Jan 29 at 4:28 | comment | added | bbgodfrey |
Your last plot should look like 0.000259733 Cos[7.41169*10^6 t]. I am surprised that NDSolve gives such credible looking but utterly wrong solution.
|
|
| Jan 29 at 4:26 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 359 characters in body; edited title
|
| Jan 28 at 23:53 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Jan 28 at 19:16 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 27 at 16:34 | comment | added | Goofy | There have been several problems like this (highly oscillatory) posted here, but I don't recall any being solved. You would think such a common problem would have been researched. Maybe try on one of the math sites, scicomp or math or mathoverflow. If there is a math solution, maybe it can be implemented in Mathematica. | |
| Jan 27 at 15:57 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 51 characters in body
|
| Jan 27 at 15:57 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 27 at 15:55 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Jan 27 at 15:48 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 477 characters in body
|
| Jan 27 at 15:37 | comment | added | Jules Alvarez |
@Goofy Yeah, but the think is that I already tried with MaxSteps -> 10^6, and even with MaxSteps -> 10^9. However, I think it is too much for my laptop, and Mathematica just closes randomly. That's why I would like to know if there is any other method to simplify it.
|
|
| Jan 27 at 3:46 | comment | added | Goofy |
It's going to take several steps per oscillation. Looks like lots of oscillations. So maybe MaxSteps -> 10^6 or higher.
|
|
| Jan 27 at 2:34 | history | edited | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 29 characters in body
|
| S Jan 27 at 2:29 | review | First questions | |||
| Jan 27 at 3:44 | |||||
| S Jan 27 at 2:29 | history | asked | Jules Alvarez | CC BY-SA 4.0 |