<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Ben Whale</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.benwhale.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.benwhale.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 00:50:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>ctypes, restype and arrays</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2012/05/09/ctypes-restype-and-arrays/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2012/05/09/ctypes-restype-and-arrays/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 00:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been having some problems accessing, as python arrays, an array returned by C code via the ctypes module. The ctypes documentation is not great, but this is.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2012/05/09/ctypes-restype-and-arrays/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>synctex + gedit + evince</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/06/26/synctex-gedit-evince/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/06/26/synctex-gedit-evince/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jun 2011 22:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Forward and backwards search for latex source and their compiled images is a must have feature for me.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/06/26/synctex-gedit-evince/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I have to write literature too?</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/29/i-have-to-write-literature-too/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/29/i-have-to-write-literature-too/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:59:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Academia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exposition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Literary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mathematics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/29/i-have-to-write-literature-too/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wish to be a successful mathematician. I want my papers to be read, enjoyed, even eagerly anticipated. I struggle, however, to write well. Most of my posts are stream of consciousness. They are my thoughts, with only a little reflection thrown in. This I don&#8217;t mind. My blog isn&#8217;t to advertise myself, allow inclusion &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/29/i-have-to-write-literature-too/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/29/i-have-to-write-literature-too/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A theoretical language to study numerical computation?</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/11/a-theoretical-language-to-study-numerical-computation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/11/a-theoretical-language-to-study-numerical-computation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 05:18:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General Relativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Numerics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Papers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Numerical Relativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[numerical_integration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symplectic manifold]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=217</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve just finished Jörg Frauendiener&#8217;s, &#8220;On the applicability of constrained symplectic integrators in general relativity&#8221;. It&#8217;s a readable paper (the necessary background is given in the paper) about numerical integration in Hamiltonian systems. The idea here is that if we have a symplectic manifold modelling the states of some system of ODE&#8217;s, along with a &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/11/a-theoretical-language-to-study-numerical-computation/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/11/a-theoretical-language-to-study-numerical-computation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What do we really know about Dark Energy?</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/05/what-do-we-really-know-about-dark-energy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/05/what-do-we-really-know-about-dark-energy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 04:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cosmology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General Relativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cosmology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dark energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redshift]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I refer you to Ruth Durrer&#8217;s very readable (and short) paper with the same title as above. The main point of the paper is that all evidence for Dark Energy comes from the measurement of luminosity distance as a function of redshift and that energy/matter content of the universe is then inferred from this measurement &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/05/what-do-we-really-know-about-dark-energy/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/04/05/what-do-we-really-know-about-dark-energy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hyperbolicity of BSSN</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/23/hyperbolicity-of-bssn/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/23/hyperbolicity-of-bssn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 04:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BSSN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hyperbolicity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Numerical Relativity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So, from what I understand it seems that strong and symmetric hyperbolicity of equations is only defined for systems with first order derivatives. The significance is that strong or symmetric hyperbolic systems of differential equations are &#8220;well posed&#8221; that is, roughly speaking, that they have unique solutions that depend continuously on the initial data (i.e. &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/23/hyperbolicity-of-bssn/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/23/hyperbolicity-of-bssn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Analytic work on constraint quantities lacking?</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/08/analytic-work-on-constraint-quantities-lacking/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/08/analytic-work-on-constraint-quantities-lacking/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 21:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General Relativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constraint quantities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general relativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Numerical Relativity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The paper provides a general introduction to how to perform analysis of the attractors of some dynamical system (with specified initial conditions) and then applies this to a particular initial value formulation of Einstein's equations.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/08/analytic-work-on-constraint-quantities-lacking/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MOND v LambdaCDM</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/02/mond-v-lambdacdm/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/02/mond-v-lambdacdm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:11:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have a soft spot for MOND. Yes, it&#8217;s a silly sounding name but I kind of like it. I must admit that this is because CDM feels a bit contrived. The CDM models requires dwarf galaxies to be missing approximately 99% of the baryons associated to their dark matter halo. A bit unnecessary perhaps? &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/02/mond-v-lambdacdm/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/03/02/mond-v-lambdacdm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Summation by parts (SBP) operators and interface boundary treatments</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/25/summation-by-parts-sbp-operators-and-interface-boundary-treatments/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/25/summation-by-parts-sbp-operators-and-interface-boundary-treatments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 04:42:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Finished of Carpenter, Nordstrom and Gottlieb&#8217;s paper, &#8220;A stable and conservative interface treatment of arbitrary spatial accuracy&#8221;. I like papers like this. It &#8216;feels&#8217; clean, organised self contained. Writing such papers takes work so when I find ones like this I take a bit more time over them. The crux of the paper is a &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/25/summation-by-parts-sbp-operators-and-interface-boundary-treatments/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/25/summation-by-parts-sbp-operators-and-interface-boundary-treatments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rate of convergence not affected by lower order convergence near boundaries</title>
		<link>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/24/rate-of-convergence-not-affected-by-lower-order-convergence-near-boundaries/</link>
		<comments>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/24/rate-of-convergence-not-affected-by-lower-order-convergence-near-boundaries/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 03:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Numerics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benwhale.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve just finished up my second reading of Gustafsson&#8217;s, &#8220;The convergence rate for difference approximations to mixed initial boundary value problems&#8221; and I&#8217;m still abit confused. The paper is referenced by (what seems to me) almost everyone and their dog as justification that a finite difference scheme can have one order of convergence less on &#8230; </p><p><a class="more-link block-button" href="http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/24/rate-of-convergence-not-affected-by-lower-order-convergence-near-boundaries/">Continue reading &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.benwhale.com/blog/2011/02/24/rate-of-convergence-not-affected-by-lower-order-convergence-near-boundaries/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

