Revision as of 06:45, 1 June 2020 edit SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,564,748 edits m Signing comment by Anilped - "→The article is one of the best introduction to finite element method . But the use of greens identities is not clear. we are in plane the weak formulation of p2 be derived more explicitly. in P1 use of mean value theorem be made explicit.: new section" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:54, 14 June 2020 edit undo John Smith Anderson (talk \| contribs) 3 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 523: Also use of Gallerkin is not made explicit . please make that use explicit in the problem. if these changes are done this can be most seductive logical introduction to fem . no good succint explnation exists on NET <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Anilped\|Anilped]] ([[User talk:Anilped#top\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Anilped\|contribs]]) 06:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> Under the heading "The weak form of P1" it is stated that the weak form implies the strong form. i.e. the equation above the line "The proof is easier for twice continuously differentiable u (mean value theorem)" I cannot find a reference anywhere to a proof of this result. I am interested in a reference to a proof of this result, and I think it will improve the article for future readers who (like me) wonder how this result is proved.

Talk:Finite element method: Difference between revisions