I hope I haven't violated the terms of this forum. If so, perhaps I should reframe the problem as occurring in an alternate universe where G is some other value than 6.674e-11, and hence not violating any laws of physics in that universe. :smile:
Assuming I go with the time-step approach, are there ways to mitigate the time-accuracy trade-off? (e.g. Take the average of the force at the beginning and end of the time interval)
Thanks again for your reply. I'd like to focus on your 3rd paragraph which I believe captures what is being asked. You wrote: "The only way to increase the amount of simulated time vs. computer time, if your computer power is fixed, is to increase the size of the time steps." I'd like to...
I am a hobbyist with interests in astronomy and game theory.
I currently work as a consultant in the software engineering area. I have the following educational background:
BSc. Mathematics and Economics
MSc. Information Technology
MBA
CPA, CMA
Over the years, many of my internet...
Hi Peter,
Thank-you for you reply, and sorry if my question was a bit vague.
Ideally I would be using a supercomputer to run my model, but sadly I am on a limited budget. As an alternative, I'm wondering if I can simulate faster behavior by introducing parameters to speed up the bodies...
Hello folks,
I am working on Java program just for fun to model an n-body problem using 3-dimension graphics. I'm looking for a way to speed up the model.
Suppose for example that I decide to increase the speeds of all objects by a factor of, say, 2. To compensate, I would also increase the...