[Users] Mclachan, CCZ4: Wrong "phi" term in Ricci tensor?
schnetter at cct.lsu.edu
Fri May 18 13:18:37 CDT 2012
The current implementation of the CCZ4 formulation in McLachlan
contains the expression (2/phi) in the definition of R[li,lj].
However, the meaning of phi depends on the conformalMethod, and this
is not explicitly taken into account here. Is this wrong?
Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu>
More information about the Users