-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 103
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Handle unbound orbits in actionAngle-related functions in new Orbit class #383
Comments
Hi, I'm running into this issue when calculating actions for 3+ million stars using galpy and am looping thru each star one by one. Do you have any suggested simple workarounds for suppressing the error and just returning nans or something for now? I've tried a couple things and no luck. Thank you! |
Thanks for reaching out, sounds like we might actually finally have to fix this issue! Quick question: Can you determine the stars for which the action-angle calculation fails just by determining which stars are unbound, that is, have E > E(infinity)? For example, assuming the import numpy
from galpy.potential import MWPotential2014, evaluatePotentials
indx= orb.E(pot=MWPotential2014,use_physical=False) < evaluatePotentials(MWPotential2014,numpy.inf,0.,use_physical=False) Does |
Hi @RaynaRampalli! Just wanted to check whether you've had a chance to try the fix that I suggested above? I'm getting ready to release a new version of galpy soon and it would be nice to include a proper fix to this issue then. Thanks! |
Hi! Sorry for the delay; thank you for responding. I have been traveling so have not had a chance yet. I will try this out and will have an answer for you in about a week. Thanks! Best,Rayna On Jun 26, 2024, at 10:09 AM, Jo Bovy ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi @RaynaRampalli! Just wanted to check whether you've had a chance to try the fix that I suggested above? I'm getting ready to release a new version of galpy soon and it would be nice to include a proper fix to this issue then. Thanks!
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
This fell off my radar until I came across this issue again just now, but I was wondering whether you ever had a chance to check the fix that I suggested @RaynaRampalli? |
So sorry, I got really busy with travel and application season. I just
tried out your solution, and it does work! Will incorporate it into my
action calculations going forward, thank you so much.
…On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 9:43 AM Jo Bovy ***@***.***> wrote:
This fell off my radar until I came across this issue again just now, but
I was wondering whether you ever had a chance to check the fix that I
suggested @RaynaRampalli <https://github.com/RaynaRampalli>?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#383 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEYD372VMJUKM3HGB5WYQHT2ATOM3AVCNFSM6AAAAABJL6MGXOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINZXGA2DIMBVGI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Great, thanks for the feedback! |
In the new Orbit class, pure Python actionAngle-related functions fail for unbound orbits and cause the entire function to fail when Orbit contains multiple objects. Need to catch the unbound orbits without raising an error (see also #371).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: