On 05/04/2012 06:15 AM, Russ P. wrote:
On May 3, 4:59 pm, someone<newsbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 05/04/2012 12:58 AM, Russ P. wrote:
Ok, but I just don't understand what's in the "empirical" category, sorry...
I didn't look it up, but as far as I know, empirical just means based
on experiment, which means based on measured data. Unless I am
FEM based on measurement data? Still, I don't understand it, sorry.
mistaken , a finite element analysis is not based on measured data.
I'm probably a bit narrow-thinking because I just worked with this small
FEM-program (in Matlab), but can you please give an example of a
matrix-problem that is based on measurement data?
Yes, the results can be *compared* with measured data and perhaps
calibrated with measured data, but those are not the same thing.
Exactly. That's why I don't understand what solving a matrix system
using measurement/empirical data, could typically be an example of...?
I agree with Steven D's comment above, and I will reiterate that a
condition number of 1e6 would not inspire confidence in me. If I had a
condition number like that, I would look for a better model. But
that's just a gut reaction, not a hard scientific rule.
I don't have any better model and don't know anything better. I still
think that 5% accuracy is good enough and that nobody needs 6-digits
precision for practical/engineering/empirical work... Maybe quantum
physicists needs more than 6 digits of accuracy, but most
practical/engineering problems are ok with an accuracy of 5%, I think,
IMHO... Please tell me if I'm wrong.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
