On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 13:49 -0500, Steven G. Johnson wrote: > This has nothing to do with MPB vs. Meep, or any other computational > package. It is a matter of physics (or mathematics). MPB is giving the > correct answer to the physical question you are asking, and any other code > will give the same answer to the same question. >
I understand that, I just suppose that if I want to simulate a slab of finite thickness, having pmls can be an advantage. In fact I haven't been very clear but what I want to simulate ultimately is a slab of finite thickness. I had obtained results that I didn't understand but these misunderstandings are, I believe, all related to band folding. I just hadn't figured it out before. And I was trying things which were a bit of a nonsense I reckon. Sorry for that! Many thanks for your help, Regards, V. Paeder
_______________________________________________ mpb-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://ab-initio.mit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mpb-discuss
