Talk:Finite element method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:40, 29 November 2014

Revision as of 23:26, 29 November 2014

Line 19:

::Unfortunately, the previous text could not be edited because it started from the wrong premise. There were misleading statements on the nature of the Finite Element Method that come from constructing the idea of the method (and terminology) from the element up, when it should be the other way around, arriving to the element formulation after formulating a variational problem and a discretization strategy. The element based approach, used by early investigators, is now considered obsolete. It has hindered the understanding of what a finite element method is. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Snervi|Snervi]] ([[User talk:Snervi|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Snervi|contribs]]) 22:39, 29 November 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:::As this reference makes clear, both approaches are still taught and used: http://www.colorado.edu/engineering/cas/courses.d/IFEM.d/IFEM.Ch01.d/IFEM.Ch01.pdf Wikipedia tries to present different approaches to a subject as long as they are supported by reliable sources, not pick the best one. If you have published reliable sources for your claims of the superiority of the variational viewpoint, the article can be structured to say something like, "Historically FEM was viewed as blah blah blah,. A more modern approach is blah blah blah, which as the following benefits..."--[[User:ArnoldReinhold|agr]] ([[User talk:ArnoldReinhold|talk]]) 23:26, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

== History ==