Users June 2012

users@lists.einsteintoolkit.org

17 participants
34 discussions

Re: [Users] Unexpectedly asymmetric WFs from WeylScal4 + Multipole?
by Kelly, Bernard J. (GSFC-660.0)[UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY] 21 Jun '12

21 Jun '12

Hmm. That *does* sound likely. I'm pretty sure I haven't updated since long before then. Thanks, Tanja! Bernard On 6/20/12 4:48 PM, "Tanja Bode" <tanja.bode(a)physics.gatech.edu> wrote: >Hi Bernard, > >Have you updated your Maxwell code recently? There was a bug (#851) >having to do >with pseudoscalar treatment in ReflectionSymmetry which, having affected >interpolations for Psi4i, manifested in a way like you described. The fix >was >backported to the Maxwell release on May 2nd. > >https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/851 > >-Tanja > >On 06/20/12 16:36, Kelly, Bernard J. (GSFC-660.0)[UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND >BALTIMORE >COUNTY] wrote: >> Hi all. >> >> I was post-processing a BHB merger run, and noticed a problem with my >> waveforms, extracted using WeylScal4 and Multipole: the (2,2) mode looks >> fine, but the (2,-2) mode is highly suppressed (by about an order of >> magnitude). Ditto the (3,+/-3) modes etc, though the amplitude mismatch >>is >> different for each (l,m) case. >> >> I thought I was post-processing incorrectly, but the problem is in the >> "mp_psi4_lX_mY_rZ.asc" files. The negative-m data is also considerably >> noisier than the positive-m data. >> >> I assume I'm missing something in my parameter file. Some subtle (or >> not-too-subtle) symmetry setting relevant to Multipole. Can someone >>help, >> please? I'm attaching my parameter file. It's adapted from the ETK >> BBHLowRes.par file (and a brief run of that appears to have the same >> issues for me). >> >> I'm using Maxwell, by the way. Any help appreciated. >> >> Bernard >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>-- >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> Users(a)einsteintoolkit.org >> http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users >

1 1

Unexpectedly asymmetric WFs from WeylScal4 + Multipole?
by Kelly, Bernard J. (GSFC-660.0)[UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY] 20 Jun '12

20 Jun '12

Hi all. I was post-processing a BHB merger run, and noticed a problem with my waveforms, extracted using WeylScal4 and Multipole: the (2,2) mode looks fine, but the (2,-2) mode is highly suppressed (by about an order of magnitude). Ditto the (3,+/-3) modes etc, though the amplitude mismatch is different for each (l,m) case. I thought I was post-processing incorrectly, but the problem is in the "mp_psi4_lX_mY_rZ.asc" files. The negative-m data is also considerably noisier than the positive-m data. I assume I'm missing something in my parameter file. Some subtle (or not-too-subtle) symmetry setting relevant to Multipole. Can someone help, please? I'm attaching my parameter file. It's adapted from the ETK BBHLowRes.par file (and a brief run of that appears to have the same issues for me). I'm using Maxwell, by the way. Any help appreciated. Bernard --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Bernard Kelly -- CRESST Research Associate, NASA/GSFC Phone: +1 (301) 286-7243 E-Mail: bernard.j.kelly(a)nasa.gov Web: http://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sed/index.cfm?fuseAction=people.jumpBio&iphone bookid=13052 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --

1 0

Compilation problem on kraken (can't find hdf module)
by Petr Tsatsin 19 Jun '12

19 Jun '12

Hello, I'm trying to compile new release on kraken and I experienced following error: /lustre/scratch/yakunin/cactus_dev4/Cactus/arrangements/EinsteinEOS/EOS_Omni/src/nuc_eos/readtable.F90(10): error #7013: This module file was not generated by any release of this compiler. [HDF5] use hdf5 ------^ Any suggestions? Thanks. -- Petr Tsatsin Graduate Student - Department of Physics Charles E. Schmidt College of Science Florida Atlantic University (561)-297-3386 cell: 561-692-2040 ptsatin(a)fau.edu, ptsatsin(a)gmail.com

2 1

Access to LSUThorns (and LSUDevelopment)
by Frank Loeffler 19 Jun '12

19 Jun '12

Hi, CCT at LSU upgrades its Subversion server tomorrow, June 20th starting from 4pm (central). This means access to thorns within LSUThorns (and LSUDevelopment) might not be possible during that upgrade. Read-only access should be possible during almost the entire transition. However, write access will be disabled within that time. Frank Loeffler

2 2

meeting minutes
by Roland Haas 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

Present were: Philipp, Erik, Peter, Steve, Bruno, Roland, Tanja, Barry Wardell * we have not yet reached a decision of whether to hold the next workshop at RIT or LSU (both of which were mentioned as possible locations) * currently the most likely dates (from the poll at http://doodle.com/ritukz79hhuvhben) are the weeks of Oct 22nd and Oct 29th * there is consensus to remove the thorns listed on https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Usage_poll by deprecating any that are not already deprecated and deprecating all options that use them in the next release. In the release after, they will be removed (unless they are already deprecated in which case they will be removed in the next release). * ADMMass which requires ADMMacros will be rewritten to not require them anymore (seems to only require UPPMETRIC). * the Outflow thorn has been accepted and will be moved to EinsteinAnalysis (needs to be done at LSU: Peter, Steve?) * will add multirate support to MoL once we understand why some GRHydro tests fail on bethe under some circumstances * there is a second set of MoL patches for IMEX that Christian Reisswig says does not conflict, Erik will follow up on what happened to them * as usual please look at outstanding patches up for review [1] Yours, Roland [1] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/query?status=review&group=component&col=id…

1 0

Einstein Toolkit Meeting Reminder
by Roland Haas 17 Jun '12

17 Jun '12

Hi Please consider joining the weekly Einstein Toolkit phone call at 10 am US central time on Mondays. As usual, you can find instructions how to join on the following web site: http://einsteintoolkit.org/community/support/ In short: the number is (+1) 225-578-4942 or (+1) 866-573-0359 and the conference id is 118682#. I will host this weeks call, so hopefully everything will go smoothly. (Some) topics to discuss: - Einstein Toolkit Workshop Time and location are not decided yet, the doodle poll for the time http://doodle.com/ritukz79hhuvhben is still open, and so far LSU (Frank) and RIT (Joshua) volunteered to host it, but no other opinions have been raised. - discuss 'potentially to be removed' component list https://docs.einsteintoolkit.org/et-docs/Usage_poll - include Outflow in ET (we have external interest)? - Multirate MoL schemes and leftover Zelmani patches - the number of open tickets has decreased considerably. There are still some simple ones left to review [1] Please feel free to add to this list (which is now slanted towards what I am interested in). Roland Haas [1] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/query?status=review&col=id&col=summary&col…

2 2

New, accurate integration method in Multipole
by Erik Schnetter 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

I just committed a new, accurate integration method "Driscoll&Healy" in thorn EinsteinAnalysis/Multipole. This method is described in J.R. Driscoll and D.M. Healy Jr., Computing Fourier transforms and convolutions on the 2-sphere, Advances in Applied Mathematics, 15(2):202–250, 1994. This method uses the interpolated values on the sphere to define a spectral reconstruction of the function on the sphere, and integrates this function, yielding essentially exponential convergence. Of course, accuracy in a production simulation will still be limited by the accuracy of the interpolation onto the sphere, as well as the accuracy of the time evolution itself. -erik -- Erik Schnetter <schnetter(a)cct.lsu.edu> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/

1 0

Re: [Users] problems with AHFinderDirect
by Vassilios Mewes 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

i used the NaNChecker thorn, and there was no warning about nans..i noticed though that the lapse gives errors shortly before the umfpack error shows up and terminates the simulation..so this is purely the AHFDirect thorn being unable to find an horizon (in this case it seems due to the lapse and density going crazy)?? the lapse attains the minimum value specified in the parameter file (1e-8) and then starts growing again and becomes negative..thats about the time when AHFinderDirect is failing (i'll do another run and check and post the exact sequence of happenings probably on monday)...without AHFinderDirect, the run gives meaningless results in both lapse and density (1e308) soon thereafter

1 0

Thorn Refluxing moved
by Erik Schnetter 14 Jun '12

14 Jun '12

We moved the thorn LSUDevelopment/Refluxing to LSUThorns/Refluxing. If you have an existing checkout, you need to move the thorn manually, or check it out anew. cd Cactus/arrangements mv LSUDevelopment/Refluxing LSUThorns/Refluxing cd LSUThorns/Refluxing svn relocate https://svn.cct.lsu.edu/repos/numrel/LSUDevelopment https://svn.cct.lsu.edu/repos/numrel/LSUThorns -erik -- Erik Schnetter <schnetter(a)cct.lsu.edu> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/

3 3

problems with AHFinderDirect
by Vassilios Mewes 14 Jun '12

14 Jun '12

Hello all, when using the AHFinderDirect thorn in a simulation of a relativistic wind past a TOV neutron star, i get the following error message: *INFO (AHFinderDirect): proc 0: searching for horizon 1/1* *[1mWARNING level 0 in thorn AHFinderDirect processor 0 host permeability.daa.uv.es* * (line 78 of /Users/vass/programs/Cactus/arrangements/EinsteinAnalysis/AHFinderDirect/src/jtutil/error_exit.cc): * * ->[0m ***** row_sparse_Jacobian__UMFPACK::solve_linear_system():* * error return status=1 from umfpack_numeric() routine* * * is that an indication that umfpack is not installed correctly (i was never prompted to install it manually and the compilation of the Einstein toolkit [Maxwell release] went on smoothly without any errors), or rather that something is wrong trying to find the horizon? (there should be an horizon, because the lapse goes to 0 fairly quickly, after which the simulation eventually crashes) thanks for your help, best wishes, Vassili

4 6

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

Users June 2012