Hi, I tried different software package for this purpose, and found ARTS is one > of the best in terms of usability. I am not sure what was the motivation > to obsolete abs_coef, which I believe is one of the most important > quantities in radiative transfer. Is there any way to keep it in the > future ARTS development? >
essentially, propmat_clearsky_field (where propmat stands for propagation matrix) holds the same information as abs_coef(_per_species) - the diff is that propmat_clearsky is always per species (gets summed up inside ARTS' RT method; you can do the same by yourinterface to your RT solver) and that it allows for vectorized RT, while abs_coef was the scalar abs coefs (0th element of the stokes_dim dimensions will give you the scalar abs coef). that is, propmat_clearsky is the more sophisticated version of abs_coef. we went from abs_coef to propmat_clearsky when introducing Zeeman effect and Faraday rotation - processes that introduce polarization even in case of pure gaseous RT. > If I could find abs_coef_per_species from the current ARTS implementation, > that would be a matrix of [f_grid,p_grid], right? If that is the case, > what is the different between abs_coef and abs_coef_per_species then? I > have read the documentation, and still have no clue on this. > > abs_coef_per_species is an ArrayOfMatrix, where each array element holds the abs coefs matrix (dimension [f_gid,p_grid]) for one species. note that with this variable type, the f_grid and p_grid can theoretically be different for each species. Best wishes, Jana -- ===================================================================== Jana Mendrok, Ph.D. (Project Assistent) Chalmers University of Technology Earth and Space Sciences SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden Phone : +46 (0)31 772 1883 =====================================================================
_______________________________________________ arts_users.mi mailing list arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/mailman/listinfo/arts_users.mi
