3+1 formalism and bases of numerical relativity - LUTh ...
3+1 formalism and bases of numerical relativity - LUTh ... 3+1 formalism and bases of numerical relativity - LUTh ...
180 Evolution schemes Now the ∇-divergence of F is related to the D-one by Besides, we have DµF µα = γ ρ µ γµ σ γνα ∇ρF σ ν = γρ σ γνα ∇ρF σ ν = γνα (∇ρF ρ ν + nρ nσ∇ρF σ ν ) = γ να (∇ρF ρ ν − F σ νn ρ ∇ρnσ) = γ να ∇µF µ ν − F αµ Dµ ln N. (10.31) γ α νn µ ∇µM ν = 1 N γα νm µ ∇µM ν = 1 N γα ν (LmM ν + M µ ∇µm ν ) = 1 N [LmM α + γ α νM µ (∇µN n ν + N∇µn ν )] = 1 N LmM α − K α µ Mµ , (10.32) where property (3.32) has been used to write γ α νLmM ν = LmM α . Thanks to Eqs. (10.31) and (10.32), and to the relation Lm = ∂/∂t −Lβ , Eq. (10.30) yields an evolution equation for the momentum constraint violation: ∂ − Lβ ∂t M i = −Dj(NF ij ) + 2NK i j Mj + NKM i + ND i (F − H) + (F − 2H)D i N . (10.33) Let us now assume that the dynamical Einstein equation is satisfied, then F = 0 [Eq. (10.12)] and Eqs. (10.29) and (10.33) reduce to ∂ ∂t − Lβ ∂ − Lβ ∂t H = −Di(NM i ) + 2NKH − M i DiN (10.34) M i = −D i (NH) + 2NK i jM j + NKM i + HD i N. (10.35) If the constraints are satisfied at t = 0, then H|t=0 = 0 and M i |t=0 = 0. The above system gives then ∂H ∂t ∂M i ∂t t=0 t=0 = 0 (10.36) = 0. (10.37) We conclude that, at least in the case where all the fields are analytical (in order to invoke the Cauchy-Kovalevskaya theorem), ∀t ≥ 0, H = 0 and M i = 0, (10.38) i.e. the constraints are preserved by the dynamical evolution equation (4.64). Even if the hypothesis of analyticity is relaxed, the result still holds because the system (10.34)-(10.35) is symmetric hyperbolic [136]. Remark : The above result on the preservation of the constraints in a free evolution scheme holds only if the matter source obeys the energy-momentum conservation law (10.23).
10.3.3 Constraint-violating modes 10.4 BSSN scheme 181 The constraint preservation property established in the preceding section adds some substantial support to the concept of free evolution scheme. However this is a mathematical result and it does not guarantee that numerical solutions will not violate the constraints. Indeed numerical codes based on free evolution schemes have been plagued for a long time by the so-called constraintviolating modes. The latter are solutions (γ,K,N,β) which satisfy F = 0 up to numerical accuracy but with H = 0 and M = 0, although if initially H = 0 and M = 0 (up to numerical accuracy). The reasons for the appearance of these constraint-violating modes are twofold: (i) due to numerical errors, the conditions H = 0 and M = 0 are slightly violated in the initial data, and the evolution equations amplify (in most cases exponentially !) this violation and (ii) constraint violations may flow into the computational domain from boundary conditions imposed at timelike boundaries. Notice that the demonstration in Sec. 10.3.2 did not take into account any boundary and could not rule out (ii). An impressive amount of works have then been devoted to this issue (see [243] for a review and Ref. [167, 217] for recent solutions to problem (ii)). We mention hereafter shortly the symmetric hyperbolic formulations, before discussing the most successful approach to date: the BSSN scheme. 10.3.4 Symmetric hyperbolic formulations The idea is to introduce auxiliary variables so that the dynamical equations become a first-order symmetric hyperbolic system, because these systems are known to be well posed (see e.g. [250, 214]). This comprises the formulation developed in 2001 by Kidder, Scheel and Teukolsky [168] (KST formulation), which constitutes some generalization of previous formulations developed by Frittelli and Reula (1996) [137] and by Andersson and York (1999) [13], the latter being known as the Einstein-Christoffel system. 10.4 BSSN scheme 10.4.1 Introduction The BSSN scheme is a free evolution scheme for the conformal 3+1 Einstein system (6.105)- (6.110) which has been devised by Shibata and Nakamura in 1995 [233]. It has been re-analyzed by Baumgarte and Shapiro in 1999 [43], with a slight modification, and bears since then the name BSSN for Baumgarte-Shapiro-Shibata-Nakamura. 10.4.2 Expression of the Ricci tensor of the conformal metric The starting point of the BSSN formulation is the conformal 3+1 Einstein system (6.105)-(6.110). One then proceeds by expressing the Ricci tensor ˜R of the conformal metric ˜γ, which appears in Eq. (6.108), in terms of the derivatives of ˜γ. To this aim, we consider the standard expression of the Ricci tensor in terms of the Christoffel symbols ˜ Γk ij of the metric ˜γ with respect to the
- Page 130 and 131: 130 The initial data problem 8.2.3
- Page 132 and 133: 132 The initial data problem where
- Page 134 and 135: 134 The initial data problem Figure
- Page 136 and 137: 136 The initial data problem Figure
- Page 138 and 139: 138 The initial data problem In par
- Page 140 and 141: 140 The initial data problem Accord
- Page 142 and 143: 142 The initial data problem Remark
- Page 144 and 145: 144 The initial data problem Remark
- Page 146 and 147: 146 The initial data problem 8.4.1
- Page 148 and 149: 148 The initial data problem Since
- Page 150 and 151: 150 The initial data problem • fo
- Page 152 and 153: 152 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 154 and 155: 154 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 156 and 157: 156 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 158 and 159: 158 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 160 and 161: 160 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 162 and 163: 162 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 164 and 165: 164 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 166 and 167: 166 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 168 and 169: 168 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 170 and 171: 170 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 172 and 173: 172 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 174 and 175: 174 Choice of foliation and spatial
- Page 176 and 177: 176 Evolution schemes been used by
- Page 178 and 179: 178 Evolution schemes Comparing wit
- Page 182 and 183: 182 Evolution schemes coordinates (
- Page 184 and 185: 184 Evolution schemes = 1 2 −∆
- Page 186 and 187: 186 Evolution schemes corresponds t
- Page 188 and 189: 188 Evolution schemes
- Page 190 and 191: 190 Lie derivative Figure A.1: Geom
- Page 192 and 193: 192 Lie derivative
- Page 194 and 195: 194 Conformal Killing operator and
- Page 196 and 197: 196 Conformal Killing operator and
- Page 198 and 199: 198 Conformal Killing operator and
- Page 200 and 201: 200 BIBLIOGRAPHY [13] A. Anderson a
- Page 202 and 203: 202 BIBLIOGRAPHY [43] T.W. Baumgart
- Page 204 and 205: 204 BIBLIOGRAPHY [75] M. Campanelli
- Page 206 and 207: 206 BIBLIOGRAPHY [105] G. Darmois :
- Page 208 and 209: 208 BIBLIOGRAPHY [135] H. Friedrich
- Page 210 and 211: 210 BIBLIOGRAPHY [163] J. Isenberg
- Page 212 and 213: 212 BIBLIOGRAPHY [195] S. Nissanke
- Page 214 and 215: 214 BIBLIOGRAPHY [226] M. Shibata :
- Page 216 and 217: 216 BIBLIOGRAPHY [255] K. Taniguchi
- Page 218 and 219: Index 1+log slicing, 161 3+1 formal
- Page 220: 220 INDEX Ricci identity, 18 Ricci
10.3.3 Constraint-violating modes<br />
10.4 BSSN scheme 181<br />
The constraint preservation property established in the preceding section adds some substantial<br />
support to the concept <strong>of</strong> free evolution scheme. However this is a mathematical result <strong>and</strong> it does<br />
not guarantee that <strong>numerical</strong> solutions will not violate the constraints. Indeed <strong>numerical</strong> codes<br />
based on free evolution schemes have been plagued for a long time by the so-called constraintviolating<br />
modes. The latter are solutions (γ,K,N,β) which satisfy F = 0 up to <strong>numerical</strong><br />
accuracy but with H = 0 <strong>and</strong> M = 0, although if initially H = 0 <strong>and</strong> M = 0 (up to <strong>numerical</strong><br />
accuracy). The reasons for the appearance <strong>of</strong> these constraint-violating modes are tw<strong>of</strong>old: (i)<br />
due to <strong>numerical</strong> errors, the conditions H = 0 <strong>and</strong> M = 0 are slightly violated in the initial<br />
data, <strong>and</strong> the evolution equations amplify (in most cases exponentially !) this violation <strong>and</strong><br />
(ii) constraint violations may flow into the computational domain from boundary conditions<br />
imposed at timelike boundaries. Notice that the demonstration in Sec. 10.3.2 did not take into<br />
account any boundary <strong>and</strong> could not rule out (ii).<br />
An impressive amount <strong>of</strong> works have then been devoted to this issue (see [243] for a review<br />
<strong>and</strong> Ref. [167, 217] for recent solutions to problem (ii)). We mention hereafter shortly the<br />
symmetric hyperbolic formulations, before discussing the most successful approach to date: the<br />
BSSN scheme.<br />
10.3.4 Symmetric hyperbolic formulations<br />
The idea is to introduce auxiliary variables so that the dynamical equations become a first-order<br />
symmetric hyperbolic system, because these systems are known to be well posed (see e.g. [250,<br />
214]). This comprises the formulation developed in 2001 by Kidder, Scheel <strong>and</strong> Teukolsky [168]<br />
(KST formulation), which constitutes some generalization <strong>of</strong> previous formulations developed<br />
by Frittelli <strong>and</strong> Reula (1996) [137] <strong>and</strong> by Andersson <strong>and</strong> York (1999) [13], the latter being<br />
known as the Einstein-Christ<strong>of</strong>fel system.<br />
10.4 BSSN scheme<br />
10.4.1 Introduction<br />
The BSSN scheme is a free evolution scheme for the conformal <strong>3+1</strong> Einstein system (6.105)-<br />
(6.110) which has been devised by Shibata <strong>and</strong> Nakamura in 1995 [233]. It has been re-analyzed<br />
by Baumgarte <strong>and</strong> Shapiro in 1999 [43], with a slight modification, <strong>and</strong> bears since then the<br />
name BSSN for Baumgarte-Shapiro-Shibata-Nakamura.<br />
10.4.2 Expression <strong>of</strong> the Ricci tensor <strong>of</strong> the conformal metric<br />
The starting point <strong>of</strong> the BSSN formulation is the conformal <strong>3+1</strong> Einstein system (6.105)-(6.110).<br />
One then proceeds by expressing the Ricci tensor ˜R <strong>of</strong> the conformal metric ˜γ, which appears<br />
in Eq. (6.108), in terms <strong>of</strong> the derivatives <strong>of</strong> ˜γ. To this aim, we consider the st<strong>and</strong>ard expression<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Ricci tensor in terms <strong>of</strong> the Christ<strong>of</strong>fel symbols ˜ Γk ij <strong>of</strong> the metric ˜γ with respect to the