LBM领域内部分活跃的专家（楼下有更新）

yfwei2007

方海平不是上海大学的。是中科院上海应用物理研究所的。

ywang

原帖由 yfwei2007 于 2010-5-7 15:24 发表

                               
登录/注册后可看大图

方海平不是上海大学的。是中科院上海应用物理研究所的。

got it，已改

gjmhit

赞一个！众楼主人品那是没得说了！

gjmhit

我所在研究室LBM方法采用的是Inamoro自由能模型，有关程序目前我已基本看懂，但感觉相关理论知识很欠缺。另外，教授希望我用LBM方法确定多孔介质内毛细压力与相饱和度的关系，这也将是我博士期间研究的主要课题。希望各位LBM的学友能结合我课题，帮我推荐让我能够尽快进入课题，和很快掌握LBM方法和相关理论的参考书和资料以及关于相场(phase field)方面参考书。
PS， 主要是教授跟本人交流有问题，恳请大家帮忙啊，小弟现在只有自己管自己的命了

gjmhit

主要是想请楼主推荐介绍多孔介质毛细压力与液体饱和度等内容的入手级的书！

[ 本帖最后由 gjmhit 于 2010-6-1 18:53 编辑 ]

IlovePY

楼主大好人啊

lianggy

比较喜欢 Xiaowen Shan， Hudong chen 的工作

[ 本帖最后由 lianggy 于 2011-3-2 01:42 编辑 ]

luo@odu.edu

I wonder what is the criterion (or criteria) for some one to be an expert (in the field of the LBE). Personally, I would think the following:

1) made long-lasting significant contributions in the field;
2) has in-depth knowledge of the field.

If so, the most important ones are missed by the list given by "haixing" and others.
Personally, I believe the true "big-shots" in the field of LBE must include the following ones:

1) Yves Pomeau
2) Pierre Lallemand
3) Dominique d'Humieres
4) Irina Ginzburg

Pomeau left the field after he made his seminal contributions -- computation and numerics have never been his interest. Ginzburg, d'Humieres, and Lallemand are still active, and they are the most formidable force in the field.

There is difference between a true expert and a charlatan. It is a tragicomic situation in China that so many charlatans claim to be experts and they seem to succeed and have good time there. Well, ...

All the best,

-- Luo Li-Shi

[ 本帖最后由 ywang 于 2011-1-24 00:25 编辑 ]

lianggy

It is a tragicomic situation in China that so many charlatans claim to be experts and they seem to succeed and have good time there. Well, ...  -- Luo Li-Shi

罗教授厉害

Boltzmann

哇，罗教授也在上这个论坛呀！

wdlxmzd

诚如罗教授所言，中国确实有很多江湖骗子，但中国也有不少让人尊敬的大师。大师不一定要学术最厉害，而是无论学术人品，抑或是其他方面，都能让人尊重的人。

luo@odu.edu

Dear Wdlxmzd,

Thanks for your response. What I said is universally true, and particularly so in China nowadays. However, that does not bother me that much. What really bothers me is that students of younger generations have been so duped by these charlatans -- they don't seem to have the basic ability to distinguish and discriminate good from bad. Of course, the youngsters are not the ones to be blamed for they have not been well advised. Then the question is where are their mentors? The situation in academics is dismal, in my view.

I agree that there are old-school gentlemen and scholars in China, but there will be fewer and fewer -- this is an endangered species. The present environment does not encourage serious learning. If you look at things posted in this discussion group, you will find that most of them have been well understood long ago (unfortunately not by those big shots who are well recognized by people on this discussion group) and mis-information is so polluted. Here are a couple of typical examples: the bounce-back boundary conditions are 1st order accurate; most only know about the lattice BGK model; the MRT-LBE is very complicated; etc. etc.

Well, I really don't have any good solution other than pointing out this reality. I only hope that by sharing my thoughts would help a few.

All the best,

-- LSL

[ 本帖最后由 luo@odu.edu 于 2012-6-24 20:48 编辑 ]

wdlxmzd

感谢罗教授的回复，的确，很多大师仅存在于老一辈了。中国的问题历来复杂，学术界的问题和中国的房地产问题一样，已经绑架了中国，要想解决不是一朝一夕。

对于国内做LBM的学生对您提到的几位大师了解很少，我个人有些观点，不知道对不对。
其一，思维习惯差异，中国的学生更习惯于东方思维，因此我们看华人，以及日本人发表的文章，更容易看懂，因为思维习惯比较接近，文章中讲述的问题往往是东方思维下容易想到的问题。我们也更容易在他们的基础上做出新的研究成果。

其二，文化和教育差异，西方人有他们的教育根基，也许他们大学教的基本知识，中国的学生根本没有学过，所以在他们看来是基本知识的东西中国学生可能根本不懂，因此他们的论文中国学生看不进去，从而难以了解。要想深入了解，需要克服不少困难，花很多时间，从做学术来说，这本是最基本的要求，但中国国内的环境根本不允许研究生们这么干，只有极少数耐得住寂寞，又能忍受毕业压力甚至导师嘲讽的人才能做得到。

  关于您提到的MRT和BGK，诚如您所言，MRT确实有许多优点，但BGK的优点特别是它的历史贡献不可以忽略更不能否定。
  可以说，没有BGK，就没有今天的LBM。LBM的飞速发展特别是其在国内的发展，很大程度上是因为BGK的简单吸引了人们。

  一个学术圈的繁荣应该允许百花齐放，百家争鸣，顺着历史的潮流，自然会有优胜劣汰的一天。MRT的确有许多优点，但认为它好的学者也应该仅限于宣传它的优点，普及它的基本知识，并选择与BGK共赢，允许其他学者继续从事和发展BGK，而不是打压BGK，否则会让很多中国的学生不知所措。
一点拙见！

luo@odu.edu

Dear Wdlxmzd,

As far as I can see, the popularity of LBGK model is the problem. It is just like addiction. An analogy of it is fast food. MacDonald is good because it tastes good and is popular. But it makes you fat, too. If you don't want be obese, you have to stay away from MacDonald. I just don't see any way around.

Now, concerning LBGK model, I don't see who is "打压BGK", and not "允许其他学者继续从事和发展BGK". Whoever wants to invest his time in a lost cause, be my guest -- no one can stop him, and no one cares to.  Almost 100% of publications from China are based on the LBGK model. So, it is indeed thriving, at least in China. My only objection is that these same people would say that LBE with bounce-back boundary conditions is only 1st order accurate, bla-bla-bla... The fact is that that's a defect specific to the LBGK model, but NOT the LBE in general. As far as math and physics are concerned, the LBGK model has NO advantages, besides it is easy to be addicted. I simply cannot imagine an inferior and defective model such as LBGK model in a win-win situation, nor do I think it is good thing that "LBM的飞速发展特别是其在国内的发展，很大程度上是因为BGK的简单吸引了人们。"

The sole point for me to voice my opinion in this forum is to advise those young students who are about to jump into this field but don't exactly know what they are doing. I only hope to save their time and effort. As for those who have faith and/or vested interest in the LBGK model, my comments are completely irrelevant and should be ignored.

The prerequisites I require my students include: calculus, linear algebra, and some basic knowledge of PDE and hydrodynamics, and that is ALL it takes to understand the MRT model. If this is indeed too much to ask for of the graduate student in China nowadays, then the situation is indeed grave.

There are other points in your comments which are far beyond the narrow domain of my knowledge (occidental vs. oriental thoughts, etc.) and I can only concede.

All the best,

-- LSL

wdlxmzd

感谢罗教授的回复。
   我并不是BGK的卫道者。
   在气体动理论中，并没有MRT，当人们直接从动理论出发构造相应的LBM模型时，往往很直接就会采用BGK，但这不是说，到这就终止了，由于BGK的简单，人们也许容易发现一些建模的规律或者说可以得到某些启发启示，而后可以将这些规律推广，构建相应的MRT模型。这也是从事LBM研究的一种可选途径。

   在FVM领域，SIMPLE系列算法发展近半个世纪，最原始的SIMPLE算法有不少缺陷，其后有很多新算法高级算法提出来，但最原始的SIMPLE算法至今仍然是从事FVM研究或者FLUENT的使用者必须掌握的基本知识，因为它代表算法的基本思想，是初学者很好的入门材料。
   
   LBGK是有很多缺陷，但它的简单就是它最大的优势，因此它也成为初学者的一个很好的切入点，成为研究者进阶的阶梯，从BGK到MRT符合由浅入深的发展规律。

[ 本帖最后由 wdlxmzd 于 2011-2-28 05:45 编辑 ]