Skip to main content
31 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 17, 2018 at 6:48 history tweeted twitter.com/StackMma/status/1019111456678309888
Jul 12, 2018 at 21:23 vote accept edinorog2196
Jul 12, 2018 at 21:23 vote accept edinorog2196
Jul 12, 2018 at 21:23
Jul 12, 2018 at 5:35 history edited bbgodfrey CC BY-SA 4.0
improved text
Jul 11, 2018 at 18:55 history edited bbgodfrey
edited tags
Jul 9, 2018 at 5:00 answer added bbgodfrey timeline score: 6
Jul 8, 2018 at 23:17 comment added edinorog2196 Now my best value for kst is kst=6.034742740284 manages to give a nice solution up to r=6
Jul 8, 2018 at 19:25 comment added edinorog2196 @bbgodfrey I've edited the post.
Jul 8, 2018 at 19:23 history edited edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0
added 85 characters in body
Jul 8, 2018 at 19:05 comment added edinorog2196 @bbgodfrey At first I used the value of d the Author gives in the plot's caption on page 5615, that says d=1 when \[Gamma]=1 (that makes the exponential of u 5). Actually in my own paper I have different values of A,a,b,d so now I tried with them, choosing the value of chi that satisfies your asymptotic condition. Should I edit the post with the new parameters? I'm now seeing the thing you said before: for properly high values of kst the solution seems to approach 1 and not be attracted from 0
Jul 8, 2018 at 18:58 comment added bbgodfrey At the end of Sec 2 of the article, a, b, and A have the values you use, but d is 9.5. The resulting asymptotic value of u is 1.26, closer but still not right. I believe that the equation can be solved once the constants are determined.
Jul 8, 2018 at 17:37 comment added edinorog2196 So i think the article I cited is not self-consistent: I have to find different values for the parameters a,b,d,A that fit the asymptotic condition you wrote, right? Only then one can solve the equation.
Jul 8, 2018 at 17:33 comment added bbgodfrey No, because the modified Bessel functions are exponentially large. I get the same numerical result for FNB that @AlexTrounev gets. (However, his answer for u is wrong, because, he uses too small a value for kst. u == 0 is an attractor, so any value of kst that is too small will lead to a solution oscillating about u == 0. On the other hand, any value of kst that is too large leads to an exponentially growing solution. This is what makes the problem hard to solve.)
Jul 8, 2018 at 17:20 comment added edinorog2196 @bbgodfrey I don't understand: the value of FNB[r] shouldn't be 0 at infinity thanks to the factor E^(-A^2 r^2) in the integral?
Jul 8, 2018 at 17:04 comment added bbgodfrey Still too large by a factor of two. Note this this is a separatrix problem, which is very sensitive to numerical details.
Jul 8, 2018 at 17:01 history edited edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0
Edit: there were mistakes as th power `5` for the `chi` factor and repetition of the term `- u[r]/r^2`
Jul 8, 2018 at 16:58 comment added edinorog2196 @bbgodfrey you are right about u[r]/r^2 and chi*(u[r])^(5) , I've edited the post. I think the discrepancy you noticed it's because the right term is 2(Pi)^(3/2)/A u[r] FNB[r] and NOT (2Pi)^(3/2)/A u[r] FNB[r] (the 2 is not powered by 3/2. Thank you for pointing out this mistake
Jul 8, 2018 at 16:52 comment added bbgodfrey The asymptotic limit of the equation is u[r] - chi*u[r]^5 - (2 Pi)^(3/2)/A u[r] FNB[r] == 0. Hence, the asymptotic solution is approximately, ((1 - FNB[12] (2 Pi)^(3/2)/A)/chi)^.25, which is 2.13479, not 1 as in the article you cited. Until this discrepancy is resolved, there is no point to trying to solve the complete equation.
Jul 8, 2018 at 14:43 answer added Alex Trounev timeline score: 1
Jul 8, 2018 at 10:30 comment added edinorog2196 Yes, but at first I used a trial function x/Sqrt[x^2+2] to find the solution in the first iteration for NDsolve, otherwise it told me that the equation was delayed. I think it's a good compromise.
Jul 8, 2018 at 10:27 history edited xzczd
edited tags
Jul 8, 2018 at 10:27 comment added xzczd So the original FNB is NIntegrate[(x u[x]^2 E^(-A^2 (r^2 + x^2)) (g0[x, r] BesselI[0, j[x, r]] - g1[x, r] BesselI[1, j[x, r]])), {x, 0, Infinity}], right?
Jul 8, 2018 at 9:47 comment added edinorog2196 @xzczd sorry, I've edited the code. The iteration is just another NDsolve to find the solution using the integral FNB2[r] computed using the solution found in the first iteraction SolNB
Jul 8, 2018 at 9:44 history edited edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0
removed yst and rst that were just a try. Also added the second "iteration" which doesn't work.
Jul 8, 2018 at 4:12 comment added xzczd Your code doesn't seem to meet your description, where's the iteration? Also, where's the definition of rst and yst?
S Jul 8, 2018 at 4:06 history edited xzczd CC BY-SA 4.0
corrected spelling
S Jul 8, 2018 at 4:06 history suggested Tom Dickens CC BY-SA 4.0
corrected spelling
Jul 8, 2018 at 3:05 review Suggested edits
S Jul 8, 2018 at 4:06
Jul 7, 2018 at 23:01 history edited edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
Jul 7, 2018 at 22:36 history edited edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 30 characters in body
Jul 7, 2018 at 22:16 history asked edinorog2196 CC BY-SA 4.0