![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: calculus, discrete, exterior, navierstokes, scale, time |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
This post is made to ask for comments about relationship between time
scales and exterior derivative. First of all, I willl describe the situation: Taylor's Formula has a discrete analog in Newton's Forward Difference Formula. This and other analogs of continuous identities are derived in Umbral calculus. An alternative approach to working with discrete/continuous analogs was to unify them. This was done by Stephan Hilger who developed a generalized derivative on a measure chain (or time scale) which unified the study of difference equations and differential equations leading to dynamic equations on time scales. Martin Bohner and Gusein Guseinov have extended the study of dynamic equations on time scales to a multivariable calculus leading to partial dynamic equations on time scales which unifies partial difference equations with partial differential equations. M. Bohner has also developed a divergence, gradient and laplacian. In differential Geometry, the vector analysis operators are seen as 3D cases of the n-dimensional exterior derivative and in Anil Hirani's PhD thesis, a discrete exterior calculus is developed including discrete versions of Div, Grad, Curl and Lapacian. Now, my question is this: Do the definitions of Bohner's Time Scale vector operators and Hirani's Discrete exterior vector operators coincide. If not, why not ? Or if so, can time scales be used to unify discrete exterior calculus with standard exterior calculus ? Secondly, how are these definitions related to discrete versions of the Navier-Stokes equations. And if the discrete version can be solved, can time scale calculus be used to go from there to a solution of the continuous version. P.S. Can time scales be combined with p-adic numbers in any useful way ? Anil Hirani's PhD thesis: http://etd.caltech.edu/etd/available...sis_hirani.pdf M.Bohner's publications: http://web.mst.edu/~bohner/pub.html |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
[..] Martin Bohner and Gusein Guseinov have extended the study of dynamic equations on time scales to a multivariable calculus leading to partial dynamic equations on time scales which unifies partial difference equations with partial differential equations. M. Bohner has also developed a divergence, gradient and laplacian. Related to this is some work I did on "space time circuits": http://www.xs4all.nl/~westy31/Electric.html#SpaceTime The references you mention seem to talk about the same thing, but in a more formal language. [..] Now, my question is this: Do the definitions of Bohner's Time Scale vector operators and Hirani's Discrete exterior vector operators coincide. If not, why not ? Or if so, can time scales be used to unify discrete exterior calculus with standard exterior calculus ? Well, in a space time circuit, the derivatives in the time direction are treated the same as in space directions, but with a negative impedance. Also, there is a clear relationship between exterior derivatives and the "coboundary operator" on the circuit. Secondly, how are these definitions related to discrete versions of the Navier-Stokes equations. And if the discrete version can be solved, can time scale calculus be used to go from there to a solution of the continuous version. I also did the Navier Stokes: http://www.xs4all.nl/~westy31/Electr...#Navier-Stokes The discrete Navier Stokes as I presented it, appears to be quite well behaved in a numerical simulation: I even did a 4-dimensional case! (I will put it on the web next week). The problem with "DNS" (Direct Numerical Simulation) of the Navier Stokes, is that you need a huge (increasing with Reynolds number) amount of cells to simulate the smallest flow structures. By using a much courser discretization, you get a solution, but you underestimate turbulence. But if you use sufficient cells, I believe the solution will be correct. But to *prove* that, you would need to solve one of the 7 Millennium problems! Gerard |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Do you think that your electrical circuit diagrams/discrete exterior calculus can be used to prove the Four color theorem in a more illuminating way than Appel and Haken's computer-assisted proof ? |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
caspro wrote:
Do you think that your electrical circuit diagrams/discrete exterior calculus can be used to prove the Four color theorem in a more illuminating way than Appel and Haken's computer-assisted proof ? Well, I don't know much about the 4 color theorem. But you might relate it to the theory of circuit diagrams, by the correspondence: color -- voltage The requirement that no adjacent colors are equal then corresponds to the requirement that no currents be zero in a solution to the circuit, while all voltages take on only 4 distinct values. You might look at circuits in which the voltages and currents are elements of fields other than the real numbers or the complex numbers. There is probably some interesting stuff out there, but after looking at it for an hour or so, I gave up for the time being. By the way, that N-dimensional fluid simulator I mentioned last time is he http://www.xs4all.nl/~westy31/CellFlow/CellFlow.html Gerard |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|