[Yt-dev] pHOP in YT question

[Matthew Turk]

Geoffrey and Stephen,

Identifying halos with only a single particle by itself makes a pretty
good argument that pHOP should apply a "minimum number of particles"
setting.  If you are interested in the requirements for resolving a
halo with Enzo (which I believe is the source of the data you are
using) you should see the discussion on yt-users between Brian O'Shea
and Michele Trenti, and the papers cited therein, for more
information.  I would humbly suggest that you rethink what you are
doing if you are trying to find the ellipsoidal extent of a four
particle "halo."  Come on, really?

Even if we were able to get past the requirement that the word "halo"
has some kind of semantic meaning when discussed in the context of a
single particle, just from the perspective of creating Python objects
for each Halo this can cause a gigantic problem.

-Matt

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Stephen Skory <s at skory.us> wrote:
> Geoffrey,
>
>> I was under the impression from our previous talk that there's a lowest
>> number threshold that pHOP requires to form a halo, I thought the number was
>> 10 particles at least.  Am I just remembering things wrong?  It has been a
>> couple of years...
>
> My memory is a bit faded, too, but I think I remember the story.
> Regular HOP does restrict halos to some particle count, but I think
> that was turned off in pHOP in favor of letting the user filter the
> answers on their own. In this sense, I think you've come to a
> satisfactory fix. Do you agree?
>
> --
> Stephen Skory
> s at skory.us
> http://stephenskory.com/
> 510.621.3687 (google voice)
> _______________________________________________
> Yt-dev mailing list
> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>