Abstract:We analyze rigorously error estimates and compare numerically spatial/temporal resolution of various numerical methods for the discretization of the Dirac equation in the nonrelativistic limit regime, involving a small dimensionless parameter 0<ε≪1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$0<\varepsilon \ll 1$$\end{document} which is inversely proportional to the speed of light. In this limit regime, the solution is highly oscillatory in time, i.e. there are propagating waves with wavelength O(ε2)\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$O(\varepsilon ^2)$$\end{document} and O(1) in time and space, respectively. We begin with several frequently used finite difference time domain (FDTD) methods and obtain rigorously their error estimates in the nonrelativistic limit regime by paying particular attention to how error bounds depend explicitly on mesh size h and time step τ\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau $$\end{document} as well as the small parameter ε\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\varepsilon $$\end{document}. Based on the error bounds, in order to obtain ‘correct’ numerical solutions in the nonrelativistic limit regime, i.e. 0<ε≪1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$0<\varepsilon \ll 1$$\end{document}, the FDTD methods share the same ε\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\varepsilon $$\end{document}-scalability on time step and mesh size as: τ=O(ε3)\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau =O(\varepsilon ^3)$$\end{document} and h=O(ε)\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$h=O(\sqrt{\varepsilon })$$\end{document}. Then we propose and analyze two numerical methods for the discretization of the Dirac equation by using the Fourier spectral discretization for spatial derivatives combined with the symmetric exponential wave integrator and time-splitting technique for temporal derivatives, respectively. Rigorous error bounds for the two numerical methods show that their ε\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\varepsilon $$\end{document}-scalability is improved to τ=O(ε2)\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau =O(\varepsilon ^2)$$\end{document} and h=O(1)\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$h=O(1)$$\end{document} when 0<ε≪1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$0<\varepsilon \ll 1$$\end{document}. Extensive numerical results are reported to support our error estimates.

Numerical optimisation of Dirac eigenvalues

Numerical optimisation of Dirac eigenvalues

Numerical optimization of Neumann eigenvalues of domains in the sphere

Dirac Eigenvalue Optimisation and Harmonic Maps to Complex Projective Spaces

Optimization of Neumann Eigenvalues under convexity and geometric constraints

Numerical Optimization of Eigenvalues of the magnetic Dirichlet Laplacian with constant magnetic field

Numerical Analysis for Dirichlet Optimal Control Problems on Convex Polyhedral Domains

On the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian for polygons

A numerical study of the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator in planar domains

Efficient Spectral and Spectral Element Methods for Eigenvalue Problems of Schrödinger Equations with an Inverse Square Potential

A Finite Element Algorithm for High-Lying Eigenvalues and Eigenfunctions with Homogeneous Neumann and Dirichlet Boundary Conditions

Geometric spectral optimization on surfaces

Computation of Laplacian eigenvalues of two-dimensional shapes with dihedral symmetry

Numerical Analysis for Neumann Optimal Control Problems on Convex Polyhedral Domains

Optimisation of Robin Laplacian eigenvalue with indefinite weight in spherical shell

Optimization of an eigenvalue arising in optimal insulation with a lower bound

Numerical Methods and Comparison for the Dirac Equation in the Nonrelativistic Limit Regime

Asymptotic location and shape of the optimal favorable region in a Neumann spectral problem

Asymptotic properties of an optimal principal Dirichlet eigenvalue arising in population dynamics

Spectral optimization for weighted anisotropic problems with Robin conditions

Comparable upper and lower bounds for boundary values of Neumann eigenfunctions and tight inclusion of eigenvalues