Re: An open note for all the Mathematica
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg108615] Re: An open note for all the Mathematica
- From: Narasimham <mathma18 at hotmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 04:26:07 -0500 (EST)
- References: <hocm80$sg3$1@smc.vnet.net>
On Mar 24, 2:32 pm, Pratip Chakraborty <pratip.chakrabo... at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear MathGroup Members, > > I have been using Mathematica for a long time now. I like it; actually it > will be better to say that I am kind of in love with it. However in the > versions of Mathematica 6 and 7 we saw many new features that are really > great. But I was thinking if the developers have any plan to increase the > numerical capabilities of Mathematica in near future. In our institute which > is a quite renowned one in the world we use Mathematica but we also face a > group of coworkers who just don't get enough convinced with the numerical > power of Mathematica. They are not completely wrong with their point of > view, I must admit that. But with my experience I feel that Mathematica > still has much scope to incorporate cutting edge algorithms that can extend > its numerical power to a much greater extent. I will specify some of them in > the following. > > Another system has extended its parallel capabilities to cover vast areas of > mathematics with their release in 2010 we must not stay behind. Another part > of hardcore numerics is finite element based computation. Mathematica still > possess very naive support for doing such things. There is no finite volume > or mesh free method implemented within Mathematica PDE solver. Once we build > a simple frame work for such things we can carry on further to enrich it and > update it with latest algorithms. Mathematica specially has this quality to > achieve them as it has such beautiful building blocks in the core supported > with elegant functional programming paradigm. > > Another missing stuff is documentation for interfacing C/C++ programs. There > is very few or no example that properly shows how powerful technology > Mathematica brings with it. Though parallel computation supported > Mathematica must now make many of its functions for manipulation and > creation of List to use the multicore architectures. Most institutes now > have large vector machines and with a little step further Mathematica can > deliver tremendous power by using this powerful hardware at their full > force. > > These are some of the things that I, being a Mathemaica lover, would like to > see implemented in near future. Of course I understand that Mathematica is a > proprietary software and the developers might not like or have the freedom > to answer or even give any hint to my questions but still I could not help > writing this post because I really like the software and want it to be > unbeatable in the field of computational science and no need to mention that > I dream that one day my colleagues will be convinced and will consider that > Mathematica is worthy to give a try even for most of the industrial scale > numerical problems. > > At last if given the chance for this post to appear in the group I will not > really look forward for a concrete answer from the core developers but a > healthy discussion does not seem to be too much to ask. All the Mathematica > gurus/lovers are encouraged also to write their suggestion for the > development team and to mention the unplugged Mathematical flowers our good > old friend Mathematica should pick up on its way to a bright future. > > With best regards to all, > > Pratip Hi Pratip,I feel the same way, both about FEM internal calculation and of course my own fondness to Mathematica. In the threads here http://groups.google.com/group/comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica/browse_thread/thread/89456f6dcde28c2e/d2013e717269bdd4?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=ansys+export#d2013e717269bdd4 I had earlier raised the question of a surface geometry modelling defined in Mathematica (example of a rectangle meshed strip pasted on a cone as shown by ParametricPlot3D with strip mesh getting bent along geodesics) --- for direct input to Ansys and later model solution. But It is seen that such wholesale export is not done, e.g., IMTEK handles only internal computation of FEM for a reduced model by Arnoldi algorithm etc. using Mathematica in the following: http://simulation.uni-freiburg.de/downloads/mor4fem Even in the thread here on topic =93 how to assemble a stiffness matrix?=94 , http://www.colorado.edu/engineering/Aerospace/CAS/courses.d/IFEM.d/IFEM.Ch25.d/IFEM.Ch25.index.html internal FEA assembly procedures between element stiffnes matrix and equation solutionstages are handled on Mathematica.( that could be handled by e.g., another system also?). I do not know if I am missing something. I feel geometry capability of Mathematica in individual parts surpasses that of Ansys,and a direct import into Ansys could be considered for future support. Best Regards, Narasimham