this was really good and instructive, thank you very much for the video! ive been studying with quarteroni's numerical mathematics book and sometimes its too raw and i cant visualize how to do the code, this helped me a lot!
Thanks for your question. If we increase n, we would theoretically get a better result, but after a certain point we can get numerical errors. Computers are not able to operate using real numbers expressed with more than a fixed number of digits. When using ForwardEuler we will encounter time constraints before we encounter numerical precision errors, though. I just ran it with n=100000000. No problems, but it took a while: around six minutes on my computer (2.3 GHz Core i9).
@@GregWintherArtist Okay. I am gonna test it for higher n's (10^10). I am pretty sure my laptop can handle it, have done before for Monte Carlo Methods (got my plot in like 10-15mins).
I really appreciate how you explained each step, makes it very easy to follow. Thank you so much!
Thanks for that. Time to implement this for my time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau simulations coupled to the ODE I need to solve!
Boomdey!!
this was really good and instructive, thank you very much for the video!
ive been studying with quarteroni's numerical mathematics book and sometimes its too raw and i cant visualize how to do the code, this helped me a lot!
Thanks for you nice comment! I am not familiar with that book, but looking at the contents it seems very abstract :/
what is the function f doing here?
amazing
Sir, if we take n = 10000 (very large!) will it give nearest to exact or it overshoots? (if thats possible).
Thanks for your question. If we increase n, we would theoretically get a better result, but after a certain point we can get numerical errors. Computers are not able to operate using real numbers expressed with more than a fixed number of digits. When using ForwardEuler we will encounter time constraints before we encounter numerical precision errors, though. I just ran it with n=100000000. No problems, but it took a while: around six minutes on my computer (2.3 GHz Core i9).
@@GregWintherArtist Okay. I am gonna test it for higher n's (10^10). I am pretty sure my laptop can handle it, have done before for Monte Carlo Methods (got my plot in like 10-15mins).
lifesaver
i like this ;0
its the first order not the second : useless