[PATCH] Re: New Bug Reports/Feature Requests

Lubomir I. Ivanov neolit123 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 2 05:15:33 PST 2016

On 2 March 2016 at 14:58, Robert Helling <helling at atdotde.de> wrote:
> Hi,
> On 29.02.2016, at 17:10, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org>
> wrote:
> Of course, I didn't actually check that the fancy math gives mostly the same
> results for air, but I assume Robert did.
> this is what I spent some time on. As I said, the van der Waals equation
> (which is what one learns in undergrad physics to be relevant to real gases)
> turns out to be terrible in this respect, the equation I used is better. But
> still, it is not perfect when compared to the empirical values from
> Wikipedia. But maybe this could be expected given that it only comes with
> two parameters (the critical temperature and the critical density).
> Have a look yourself:

hmm, that looks quite off to me considering the scale (the level of
precision) of the ordinate.

> The blue dots are the table from Wikipedia, the yellow curve is van der
> Waals and the red is the one from my patch. There is a clear trend to be too
> small but I would rate this as „good enough“, in particular as it also
> generalizes to other gases.

so, those least-square polynomials that i posted went exactly through
the points and are still the most accurate solution in this thread (if
the empirical values make sense), but i guess they won't cover all use


More information about the subsurface mailing list