Proving a Solution of \[u_{tt} - c^2 u_{xx} = 0\]

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Palindrom
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that the solution \( u(x,t) \) of the wave equation \( u_{tt} - c^2 u_{xx} = 0 \) remains constant along the line \( x = 2 + ct \). The user demonstrates that \( u_t + cu_x = 0 \) holds true for points right of the line \( x = 2 - ct \) but struggles to extend this proof to all points in \( \mathbb{R}^2 \). The conversation highlights the need for a more general approach to prove the constancy of \( u(x,t) \) across the entire domain.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of partial differential equations (PDEs)
  • Familiarity with the wave equation and its properties
  • Knowledge of the method of characteristics
  • Basic calculus, specifically differentiation with respect to multiple variables
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the method of characteristics for solving PDEs
  • Explore the implications of the wave equation in various physical contexts
  • Learn about the uniqueness and existence theorems for solutions of PDEs
  • Investigate advanced techniques in functional analysis related to PDEs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students studying partial differential equations, particularly those interested in wave phenomena and their mathematical foundations.

Palindrom
Messages
263
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone.

I tried a bit, but got stuck.

Let [tex]\[u\left( {x,t} \right)\][/tex] be a solution of [tex]\[u_{tt} - c^2 u_{xx} = 0<br /> \][/tex], and suppose [tex]\[u\left( {x,t} \right)\][/tex] is constant along the line [tex]\[<br /> x = 2 + ct<br /> \][/tex]. Then [tex]\[u\left( {x,t} \right)\][/tex] must keep:[tex]\[<br /> u_t + cu_x = 0<br /> \][/tex]
I can prove it for any point [tex]\[<br /> \left( {x,t} \right)<br /> \][/tex] which is right to the line [tex]\[<br /> x = 2 - ct<br /> \][/tex]. I don't see any way to prove it for the points left to that line.
Is there a simpler way, or more general one that doesn't make that last line special?
Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
U know that

[tex]u\left(2+ct,t\right)=C[/tex]

Take the PD wrt "t"

[tex]\frac{\partial u}{\partial (2+ct)}\frac{d(2+ct)}{dt}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} =0[/tex]

Equivalently,using that [itex]2+ct=x[/itex]

[tex]\frac{\partial u}{\partial x} c+\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} = 0[/tex]

Q.e.d.

Daniel.
 
Well it's the first thing I did, but then it only proves it along the line [tex]\[<br /> x = 2 + ct<br /> \][/tex].
[tex]\[<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> \frac{d}{{dt}}\left( {u\left( {2 + ct,t} \right)} \right) = 0 \\ <br /> \frac{{\partial \left( {u\left( {x\left( t \right),t} \right)} \right)}}{{\partial x}}\frac{{\partial x\left( t \right)}}{{\partial t}} + u_t \left( {2 + ct,t} \right) = 0 \\ <br /> u_t \left( {2 + ct,t} \right) + cu_x \left( {2 + ct,t} \right) = 0 \\ <br /> \end{array}<br /> \][/tex]
I need to prove it for all [tex]\[<br /> \left( {x,t} \right) \in \Re ^2 <br /> \][/tex]

It's driving me a little crazy...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K