Re: Bob's 'Self-aggrandizing ignorant' Count: Was: What databases have taught me

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 22:24:13 GMT
Message-ID: <h4grg.7210$pu3.160812@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Chris Smith wrote:

> Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>

>>How about a simulation instead? For things like the weather, climate 
>>change, epidemiology, fluid flows around objects like propellers, or the 
>>norwegian simulations back in the 1960's that OO was invented for.

>
> This is a little OT, but as it turns, there's a pretty big difference
> between discrete simulations and continuous simulations. OO isn't
> really any stronger at continuous simulations than anything else I can
> think of. I'd think one would use continuous methods for simulating
> fluid flows, since it's basically a matter of solving the Navier-Stokes
> equations. Simula was designed for discrete event simulations, which
> works for stuff like social models, population biology, etc.

First, one divides the space around the solid structure into small pieces. Then one solves systems of equations for all of those pieces. Sounds like a good job for objects to me.

If it is not such a good idea, why are those pesky norwegians using OO for finite element analyses? Received on Thu Jul 06 2006 - 17:24:13 CDT