Solve General Relativity "Paradox" w/ Automatic Diff. ODE Solver

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of an Automatic Differentiation based ODE solver to address a specific equation related to General Relativity, as referenced in an article. Participants explore the implementation of this solver and its application to equations derived from the article, while also considering the challenges of verifying results against a provided table.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their work on an Automatic Differentiation based ODE solver and its application to solve equation (7) from the referenced article, sharing results from their console output.
  • Another participant references a previous discussion about various clocks, suggesting a connection to the current topic.
  • A participant expresses satisfaction with their progress in extracting results programmatically from the equation solver.
  • One participant raises a challenge regarding how to verify results against a table following equation (8), contemplating the need for brute-force evaluation and interpolation methods.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to be engaged in a collaborative exploration of the topic, but there is no explicit consensus on the methods or results discussed. The challenges raised indicate ongoing uncertainty and differing approaches to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific equations and methods without fully resolving the mathematical steps or assumptions involved in their approaches. The discussion reflects a reliance on the definitions and contexts provided in the referenced article.

m4r35n357
Messages
657
Reaction score
148
After making a couple of comments on this StackExchange question, and pointing yet again to this article, a thought occurred to me.

I have been working on an Automatic Differentiation based ODE solver and equation analyzer, mentioned in this thread. Why not use it to solve equation (7) in the article, and plug in my answer to equation (8)? All I have to do is write a test client containing the appropriate equations ;)

Well, I had to do a bit of work to extract the equation solver results programmatically rather than just printing them out, but I did get it working! Here's what it looks like in the console (the ratio is of the proper times of the radial to circular paths):
Python:
$ ./grtwins.py 2 -2 2 1001 0 1e-9 1e-9 | ./plotMany.py 2 300 >/dev/null
taylor module loaded
series module loaded
playground module loaded
Newton's method
ResultType(count=4, sense='-', mode='ROOT', x=1.5843306502838275, f=-7.105427357601002e-15, dx=-1.0310205845716116e-16)
(4.932330448527358, 1.3413587820012287)
n = 1
alpha = 1.5843306502838275
r1 = 4.932330448527358
r2 = 10.0
ratio = 1.3413587820012287
A plot of the alpha function in the article is attached (function value is black, the rest are the first six derivatives). I am still in the process of testing for accuracy, but thought I'd post while I was motivated ;) If anyone wants to join in the fun, the software (which uses Python3 and matplotlib) is here.
 

Attachments

  • Figure_1-3.png
    Figure_1-3.png
    15.9 KB · Views: 453
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
m4r35n357 said:
I had to do a bit of work to extract the equation solver results programmatically rather than just printing them out, but I did get it working
Excellent!
 
Dale said:
Excellent!
Cheers ;)

I'm now scratching my head wondering how I can check against the table following eq(8). I am starting with r2, working out q, then alpha, then r1. How to go the other way round is not particularly obvious . . . I can only think of brute-force evaluating lots of r2 and alpha values, inverting using eq(6), and then interpolating (not nice at all!).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
488
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K