|
From: | Olaf Lenz |
Subject: | Re: [h5md-user] fix remaining imprecisions - particle position |
Date: | Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:36:41 +0100 |
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:18:42PM +0100, Felix Höfling wrote:
> Am 10.01.2014, 15:01 Uhr, schrieb Pierre de Buyl
> <address@hidden>:
>
> >read position
> >if coordinate i is of type 'periodic' and 'image' is present
> >then
> > compute position_i += image_i*edges_i
> >else
> > position is fine the way it is
> >end if
> >
> >The modification would be to remove "Otherwise, the data indicate
> >absolute
> >positions in space." Then, the following cases are ok:
> >- periodic position, with no 'image', such as the Monte Carlo
> >mentioned above.
> >- periodic positions, with 'image'
> >- absolute position: as long as there is no 'image' element, you
> >can store
> > absolute positions even if the boundary is periodic.
> >
> >Olaf, does that reply to your query about the MSD?
> >
>
> Basically, what your scheme above states is "Otherwise, the position dataOk, it does look equivalent actually :-)
> are fine the way they are." How shall we phrase it in a concise and less
> familiar way?
>
> To me, "absolute position" means that the data do not need further
> adjustment, which is precisely what you're saying. I wouldn't drop the
> sentence to also specify what is meant if image is absent.
Then, maybe one would need to clarify that 'image' is only to be used in those
directions that specify 'periodic' for the boundary? (i.e. a wall in z but PBC
in x and y)? 'image' would be zero any in direction z then so the interpretation
of the file does not change.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |