[Users] ML and ADMConstraints

[Luca Baiotti]

 From this I understand that ADMConstraints should not be used with ML. 
In order to prevent accidental use, would it be possible to insert a 
parameter check in ML that warns against ADMConstraints? Or at least a 
note in the README file and documentation of ADMConstraints?

Luca

On 22/3/12 10:57 AM, Erik Schnetter wrote:
> ADMConstraints does not know about TmunuBase. TmunuBase has a
> compatibility mechanism, but this may be disabled (either by default
> or by choice).
>
> Also, ADMConstraints is only second order accurate by default
> (depending on ADMMacros).
>
> -erik
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Ian Hinder<ian.hinder at aei.mpg.de>  wrote:
>>
>> On 21 Mar 2012, at 06:00, Luca Baiotti wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> McLachlan has its own code to compute the violation of the constraints,
>>> but is thorn ADMConstraints also supposed to work with ML? I found that
>>> ML_ADMConstraints and ADMConstraints give results that differ of orders
>>> of magnitude.
>>
>> Luca has been discussing this with me.  I believe the situation is that ML_BSSN and ML_ADMConstraints give consistent values for the constraints, but ADMConstraints gives results which differ by orders of magnitude.  Note that this occurs where there is matter.  Is it possible that ADMConstraints does not use the correct matter-coupling mechanism for the stress-energy tensor?
>>
>> --
>> Ian Hinder
>> http://numrel.aei.mpg.de/people/hinder
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at einsteintoolkit.org
>> http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users