I Simulating GR: Worth the Effort?

  • Thread starter Thread starter accdd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gr
Click For Summary
Simulating phenomena in general relativity (GR) is computationally complex but can enhance understanding of theoretical concepts. The current interest in GR is fueled by observable gravitational waves from neutron-star mergers, making it a timely area for study. Basic programming skills in Python and Julia can be sufficient for engaging with numerical methods in this field. While detailed simulations are resource-intensive, simpler simulations can still yield valuable insights. Overall, developing computational skills in GR is considered beneficial and relevant in today's research landscape.
accdd
Messages
95
Reaction score
20
I know that simulation of phenomena in general relativity is computationally complex. However, simulating the phenomena you are studying often helps. In your opinion, should I study methods to simulate what happens in relativity? Is it worth it? Or would it distract me from the theoretical aspects?
I only know the basic programming in python and julia.
I am studying GR from Carroll's book.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd say, if you are interested in numerical calculations in physics, it's a great time to do this in the field of general relativity right now. This field is "quite hot" at the moment due to the observability of gravitational wave signals from neutron-star mergers. It's also a fascinating, broad topic of (theoretical) physics, involving relativistic hydrodynamics and magnetohydrodynamics as well as the equation of state of nuclear matter (high-energy nuclear physics) with close relations to heavy-ion physics as explored at the LHC, RHIC and in the near future close to my home at FAIR.

Here's the website of my astrophysical colleagues, working in this field:

https://relastro.uni-frankfurt.de/
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman, PeroK and accdd
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes accdd and vanhees71
vanhees71 said:
Here's the website of my astrophysical colleagues, working in this field:

https://relastro.uni-frankfurt.de/

I love the ITP Calendar for Upcoming Events... :smile:

1654007562016.png
 
When results can’t easily be obtained by pure theoretical or mathematical methods, then (apart from actually building the system or finding the system and taking measurements of it) numerical methods are likely your only way to make progress.

Certainly, a detailed simulation (of any system) has a lot of complexity and may require many resources… but not every simulation has to be that detailed.

Here’s a new book by a colleague that may be helpful:
Numerical Relativity: Starting from Scratch
Baumgarte & Shapiro
https://www.cambridge.org/core/book...rom-scratch/FB5B832C4ED8EFE65A5834C6D6D4657D#

In my opinion, computation is a valuable skill not to be underestimated or undervalued, especially these days.
 
  • Like
Likes accdd and vanhees71
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
541
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
669
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
591
Replies
6
Views
2K