Skip to main content
AccidentalFourierTransform's user avatar
AccidentalFourierTransform's user avatar
AccidentalFourierTransform's user avatar
AccidentalFourierTransform
  • Member for 8 years, 9 months
  • Last seen more than a week ago
comment
NIntegrate: variable is not a valid limit of integration
replace int1[zh_] by int1[zh_?NumericQ] (and same for int2).
Loading…
comment
Deriving a first-order condition and plotting it generates some outliers
@ppp Made a typo when copying+pasting, should work now. As for varying the parameters, that's not something my code is going to help with...
revised
Loading…
revised
Loading…
revised
Loading…
Loading…
comment
Deriving a first-order condition and plotting it generates some outliers
what does $\sum _{j=1}^{\frac{1}{\text{lambda}}-1} (i+1)^j$ mean? 1/lambda is not in general an integer. Also, for $e$ close to $0$ or $1$, $1/\lambda$ diverges so most expressions become meaningless.
comment
Analytic solution expected
@IosifPinelis Right, one should disregard that part of my answer. That curve simply gives the condition for the ODE to have a unique solution instead of a pair (the curve is the discriminant of the quadratic in $a'$). But you are absolutely correct in that the curve does not necessarily solve the ODE generically. For example there is no choice of initial condition for which $c+u\pm u^2/2$ collapses to a single function.
comment
Analytic solution expected
@yarchik Your initial ODE has a unique solution but your manipulations introduced a second, fictitious solution (as I mentioned above, your reduced system has two solutions). I only wrote one of the two solutions and I suspect that I chose the wrong one. What I wrote above is most likely the fictitious solution, not the one you want. I need to think whether it is possible to find the other solution as well.
comment
Analytic solution expected
@yarchik Thank you for the nice words! I'm not sure I understand the relation between this post and the one on overflow. If you take the solution here and expand around $u=\infty$ you find $a\sim -1/u+\cdots$ which is different from the asymptotics $a\sim-1.024/u+\cdots$. The two systems do not seem to be equivalent, no?
answered
Loading…
comment
RG flow trajctory plot using StreamPlot
@cvgmt Not really. The equations in the OP are compatible only along the line $$\frac{1}{2}(x^2+y^2)+\frac{\pi (x+y) (\pi -\arccos(-\frac{1}{2} (x+y)))}{\sqrt{4-(x+y)^2} \arccos(-\frac{1}{2} (x+y))^3}=0$$You can check this using the code {a'[L], b'[L], c'[L]} == {-(b[L]^2 + c[L]^2), (2 - 4 a[L]) b[L], (2 - a[L]) c[L]} /. {a -> (\[Pi]/(2 ArcCos[-(x[#] + y[#])/2]) &), b -> ((x[#] + y[#])/2 &), c -> ((x[#] - y[#])/2 &)} // Thread %[[1]] /. Solve[%[[2 ;; 3]], {x'[L], y'[L]}][[1]] // Simplify
comment
RG flow trajctory plot using StreamPlot
There is no x-y plane. x and y are not independent.
comment
RG flow trajctory plot using StreamPlot
Note that $a=\pi/(2 \arccos(-b))$ so the system is overdetermined. Equivalently the variables $x,y$ are not independent but satisfy a constraint $f(x,y)=0$. So what exactly do you mean by a 2d plot?
comment
Plotting solutions to an equation for varying parameter value produces empty graphs
@ppp Works fine on my laptop, see i.imgur.com/eXn7NeO.png Did you try on a fresh kernel? What version are you using? Can you run the code line by line and let me know which specific part makes it hang?
comment
Plotting solutions to an equation for varying parameter value produces empty graphs
@ppp Works for me, used your pastebin and it returned the expected output in 5min or so.
revised
Root finding for holomorphic functions, II
deleted 12 characters in body
Loading…
Loading…
comment
1
2 3 4 5
61