Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with galerkin
Search options not deleted
user 48766
3
votes
0
answers
149
views
Galerkin Method - Why does integration-by-parts eliminate need to enforce Neumann boundaries?
I've posted this to MathStackexchange but I figured I'd also post here as well as I have yet to receive an answer on my original post, and that I would be more likely to encounter users of the Galerkin … From what I know of the Galerkin method, it is about approximating $u$, to a invertible linear system $Au=f$, as a vector in some subspace of the original square-integrable function space that $u$ resides …
