From b1d7ae064c528433ad38ca77515b7991c424d78c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Grote Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 11:29:10 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Update comment about energy conservation --- Source/FieldSolver/ImplicitSolvers/StrangImplicitSpectralEM.H | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Source/FieldSolver/ImplicitSolvers/StrangImplicitSpectralEM.H b/Source/FieldSolver/ImplicitSolvers/StrangImplicitSpectralEM.H index 61875f4acfc..a674dd6de76 100644 --- a/Source/FieldSolver/ImplicitSolvers/StrangImplicitSpectralEM.H +++ b/Source/FieldSolver/ImplicitSolvers/StrangImplicitSpectralEM.H @@ -27,7 +27,9 @@ * up^{n+1} = up^n + dt*qp/mp*(Ep^{n+1/2} + up^{n+1/2}/gammap^{n+1/2} x Bp^{n+1/2}) * Advance (Eg^n+1/2, Bg^n+1/2) -> (Eg^{n+1}, Bg^{n+1}) source free // E transverse * - * The algorithm is exactly energy conserving for. + * The algorithm is exactly energy conserving only with a single box, periodic fft (psatd.periodic_single_box_fft = 1). + * With multiple boxes, energy is not conserved since the ffts in each box assumes periodic in the box which + * is not consistent with the current. * The algorithm is numerially stable for any time step. * I.e., the CFL condition for light waves does not * have to be satisifed and the time step is not limited by the plasma period. However, how