i use this method and run my simulation for a long time, if i can understand how much my time’s simulation i can use my result…are you know how much my time’s simulation with this data or not?!!
unit lj
timestep 0.005
fix 8 flow ave/spatial 2 5000 10000 y center 0.05 vx units reduced file vel.profile
run 100000
i usually solve my problem with lammps… I just want to quickly solve my problem causes i send e-mail to mail list…
i use this method and run my simulation for a long time, if i can understand
how do you know that your simulation is correct if you don't
understand reduced units?
how much my time's simulation i can use my result...are you know how much my
time's simulation with this data or not?!!
nobody can. as has been pointed out to you before, the unit of time
depends on your choice of (reduced) unit of energy, length and mass.
unit lj
timestep 0.005
fix 8 flow ave/spatial 2 5000 10000 y center 0.05 vx units
reduced file vel.profile
run 100000
i usually solve my problem with lammps.. I just want to quickly solve my
problem causes i send e-mail to mail list...
let me translate this into normal language:
so what you are saying is that you are either too lazy to sit down and
figure it out by yourself or don't consider it worth your time, and
that you'd rather have somebody much more senior and experienced do
what is essentially your "homework" for you.
good luck with that...
axel.
i use this method and run my simulation for a long time, if i can understand
how do you know that your simulation is correct if you don’t
understand reduced units?
i validate my result with this : “http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-08202007-195746/” and i see perfect match in result…
i don’t tell you i don’t understand reduce unit… you’ve had such think…
how much my time’s simulation i can use my result…are you know how much my
time’s simulation with this data or not?!!
nobody can. as has been pointed out to you before, the unit of time
depends on your choice of (reduced) unit of energy, length and mass.
i know this and i sent their value in the past email:
m=1.6605389210^-27kg
epsilon=6.88935923 * 10-21 m^2kg/s^2
sigma=110^-10 m
unit lj
timestep 0.005
fix 8 flow ave/spatial 2 5000 10000 y center 0.05 vx units
reduced file vel.profile
run 100000
i usually solve my problem with lammps… I just want to quickly solve my
problem causes i send e-mail to mail list…
let me translate this into normal language:
so what you are saying is that you are either too lazy to sit down and
figure it out by yourself or don’t consider it worth your time, and
that you’d rather have somebody much more senior and experienced do
what is essentially your “homework” for you.
good luck with that…
axel.
okay my english is poor but i have a correct question and i want somebody help me… meantime you tell us this is a bit confusing in the other email:
"the expression in the manual makes sense if you read it as:
t (epsilon / m / sigma^2)^1/2
granted it is a bit confusing, but please also see the following lines
where the same applies. because of the convention to use t*, it would
be even more confusing to use a ‘*’ to indicate multiplication."
and this subject have some comment such as:
"yes, it should just be:
time = tau, where t* = t (eps …)^1/2
I.e. t* is in unitless units of tau.
Hadn’t noticed it - will change it
thanks,
Steve"
i just want to compare my idea with you and know your idea about my time’s simulation…!
i use this method and run my simulation for a long time, if i can
understandhow do you know that your simulation is correct if you don't
understand reduced units?i validate my result with this :
"http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-08202007-195746/" and i see
perfect match in result..
i don't tell you i don't understand reduce unit.. you've had such think..
if you would understand them, you would not ask. that very thesis you
quote explains reduced units as well.
how much my time's simulation i can use my result...are you know how much
my
time's simulation with this data or not?!!nobody can. as has been pointed out to you before, the unit of time
depends on your choice of (reduced) unit of energy, length and mass.i know this and i sent their value in the past email:
m=1.66053892*10^-27kg
epsilon=6.88935923 * 10-21 m^2kg/s^2
sigma=1*10^-10 m
do you simulate hydrogen atoms with a radius of 1 angstrom? seriously???
unit lj
timestep 0.005
fix 8 flow ave/spatial 2 5000 10000 y center 0.05 vx units
reduced file vel.profile
run 100000
i usually solve my problem with lammps.. I just want to quickly solve my
problem causes i send e-mail to mail list...let me translate this into normal language:
so what you are saying is that you are either too lazy to sit down and
figure it out by yourself or don't consider it worth your time, and
that you'd rather have somebody much more senior and experienced do
what is essentially your "homework" for you.good luck with that...
axel.
okay my english is poor but i have a correct question and i want somebody
help me.. meantime you tell us this is a bit confusing in the other email:
sorry, but this is the "lammps users" mailing list and not the "please
do my work for me".
"the expression in the manual makes sense if you read it as:
t <times> (epsilon / m / sigma^2)^1/2
granted it is a bit confusing, but please also see the following lines
where the same applies. because of the convention to use t*, it would
be even more confusing to use a '*' to indicate multiplication."
the confusion is in regard to the notation. but i *did* explain how to
read that line, it is consistent with the thesis that you refer to and
yet you *still* don't get it.
what should be even more embarrassing to you is that it took me only
two minutes of looking at that pdf to see that they answer that you
are asking for is actually spelled out in that very document you claim
to use as a reference. go read that pdf properly.
and this subject have some comment such as:
"yes, it should just be:
time = tau, where t* = t (eps ...)^1/2
I.e. t* is in unitless units of tau.
Hadn't noticed it - will change it
thanks,
Steve"
i just want to compare my idea with you and know your idea about my time's
simulation....!
that is BS.
i use this method and run my simulation for a long time, if i can
understandhow do you know that your simulation is correct if you don’t
understand reduced units?
i validate my result with this :
“http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-08202007-195746/” and i see
perfect match in result.
i don’t tell you i don’t understand reduce unit… you’ve had such think…
if you would understand them, you would not ask. that very thesis you
quote explains reduced units as well.
i use manual for reduce unit and understand them… i dont know calculation of time with this formula (in lj unit) (t?)
i use EMD method and when the values (temperature and total energy) were stable i use result and plot them now i want to know for example 100000 time step how much my time’s simulation…
how much my time’s simulation i can use my result…are you know how much
my
time’s simulation with this data or not?!!nobody can. as has been pointed out to you before, the unit of time
depends on your choice of (reduced) unit of energy, length and mass.
i know this and i sent their value in the past email:
m=1.6605389210^-27kg
epsilon=6.88935923 * 10-21 m^2kg/s^2
sigma=110^-10 m
do you simulate hydrogen atoms with a radius of 1 angstrom? seriously???
no i just use this values for unitless of sigma of oxygen hydrogen and other atom’s type… in the unitless simulation ratios are important…!
unit lj
timestep 0.005
fix 8 flow ave/spatial 2 5000 10000 y center 0.05 vx units
reduced file vel.profile
run 100000
i usually solve my problem with lammps… I just want to quickly solve my
problem causes i send e-mail to mail list…let me translate this into normal language:
so what you are saying is that you are either too lazy to sit down and
figure it out by yourself or don’t consider it worth your time, and
that you’d rather have somebody much more senior and experienced do
what is essentially your “homework” for you.good luck with that…
axel.
okay my english is poor but i have a correct question and i want somebody
help me… meantime you tell us this is a bit confusing in the other email:
sorry, but this is the “lammps users” mailing list and not the “please
do my work for me”.
i dont understand why you have the urge to think i want to say do my work for me?!! i have a question about time of my simulation… and i say are you can help me (about this subject not more) or not?!
"the expression in the manual makes sense if you read it as:
t (epsilon / m / sigma^2)^1/2
granted it is a bit confusing, but please also see the following lines
where the same applies. because of the convention to use t*, it would
be even more confusing to use a ‘*’ to indicate multiplication."
the confusion is in regard to the notation. but i did explain how to
read that line, it is consistent with the thesis that you refer to and
yet you still don’t get it.
okay i use your instruction and achieve a value about t but i want to be sure…
what should be even more embarrassing to you is that it took me only
two minutes of looking at that pdf to see that they answer that you
are asking for is actually spelled out in that very document you claim
to use as a reference. go read that pdf properly.
okay you are very clever and skilled in this subject but i just do not understand the taking total time… or maybe i tell my purpose as bad…
and this subject have some comment such as:
"yes, it should just be:
time = tau, where t* = t (eps …)^1/2
I.e. t* is in unitless units of tau.
Hadn’t noticed it - will change it
thanks,
Steve"
i just want to compare my idea with you and know your idea about my time’s
simulation…!
that is BS…
What to do with the subject?
yes, *BUT* if you only look at the ratio, then you *CANNOT* have an
absolute time. full stop.
here you are just proving again that you do not *fully* understand
reduced units.
for example, if you keep the mass ratio between two particle types
constant, but double the reference mass (i.e. your mass unit in real
units), then your time unit (in real units) is also different
(enlarged by a factor of sqrt(2)). similar transformations happen with
changes to energy and length unit. thus without actually substituting
real *absolute* values for *all* parameters that reflect the *actual*
particles you want to simulate, then you *cannot* compute an absolute
time.
so. for the last time. read that pdf again, that you referenced and
see how the author relates his studies to a real element (argon, IIRC)
and then you may be able to do that for your system yourself. please
keep in mind that this is basic physics stuff and way off-topic for
this mailing list.
axel.