Solve y'' + (At + B)y' + (Ct + D)y = 0: Strategies

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Lyuokdea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Strategy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the second-order differential equation y'' + (At + B)y' + (Ct + D)y = 0, where t is a variable and A, B, C, and D are constants. Participants explore various methods for finding an analytical solution, including power series and Laplace transforms, while addressing issues related to the formulation and integration of the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant, Lyuokdea, presents an iterative relationship derived from a Taylor series approach but expresses uncertainty about finding an analytical function that fits.
  • Another participant suggests that Lyuokdea's findings may be incorrect due to the nature of second-order differential equations and recommends revisiting the series solution.
  • Lyuokdea defends their approach, providing detailed reindexing of the series and reiterating the iterative formula.
  • A suggestion is made to use Laplace transforms, noting that while it may lead to a first-order ODE, the integration could become complex depending on initial conditions.
  • Another participant later recommends returning to power series methods after evaluating the difficulties with Laplace transforms.
  • There is a discussion about the number of constants of integration, with Lyuokdea questioning the claim of having only three when four constants appear in their expression.
  • One participant points out that the presence of (Ct + D) in the equation complicates the series solution due to the different powers of t involved.
  • Another participant provides a specific formulation for the coefficients in the series expansion, suggesting verification through numerical methods and software like Mathematica.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best method to solve the differential equation, with multiple competing views on the appropriateness of series solutions versus Laplace transforms. Some participants express uncertainty about the correctness of earlier claims and the implications of the constants involved.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the assumptions made in the series expansion and the implications of the constants A, B, C, and D on the solution. The discussion reflects the complexity of the problem and the challenges in deriving a clear analytical solution.

Lyuokdea
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
I've been working through an equation for awhile and finally reduced it to a differential equation I have to solve, but I'm not sure how to solve it, the equation is:

[tex]y'' + (At + B)y' + (Ct + D)y = 0[/tex]

Where t is a variable and A..D are constants. I attempted to solve this using taylor approximations and found the iterative relationship:

[tex]a_{n+2} = \frac{B(n+1)a_{n+1} + Ca_{n-1} + (An+D)a_n}{(n+1)(n+2)}[/tex]

But I don't know of any analytical functions that look anything like that. I could of course get a numeric approximation, but I need an actual analytic function. Does anybody have any suggestions on any methods which I should use in order to solve this function?

Thanks in advance,

~Lyuokdea
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you've found has to be wrong; it's a second order differential equation and you have three constants of integration. I would recommend trying the series solution again.
 
I looked through it again, and I'm still not seeing my error:


[tex]y= \sum_{n=0}a_nt^n[/tex]
[tex]y'= \sum_{n=1}na_nt^{n-1}[/tex]
[tex]y''=\sum_{n=2}n(n-1)a_nt^{n-2}[/tex]

[tex]\sum_{n=2}n(n-1)a_nt^{n-2} + \sum_{n=1}na_nt^{n-1}(At+B) + \sum_{n=0}a_nt^n(Ct+D) = 0[/tex]


Reindexing yields:

[tex] \sum_{n=0}(n+2)(n+1)a_{n+2}t^{n} + \sum_{n=1}Ana_nt^{n} + \sum_{n=0}B(n+1)a_{n+1}t^n + \sum_{n=1}Ca_{n-1}t^n + \sum_{n=0}Da_{n}t^n = 0[/tex]

which seems to yield the iterative formula I gave before, is there something wrong with the math here, maybe I'm just screwing something up.

~Lyuokdea
 
Last edited:
Lyuokdea said:
I've been working through an equation for awhile and finally reduced it to a differential equation I have to solve, but I'm not sure how to solve it, the equation is:

[tex]y'' + (At + B)y' + (Ct + D)y = 0[/tex]

Where t is a variable and A..D are constants. I attempted to solve this using taylor approximations and found the iterative relationship:

[tex]a_{n+2} = \frac{B(n+1)a_{n+1} + Ca_{n-1} + (An+D)a_n}{(n+1)(n+2)}[/tex]

But I don't know of any analytical functions that look anything like that. I could of course get a numeric approximation, but I need an actual analytic function. Does anybody have any suggestions on any methods which I should use in order to solve this function?

Thanks in advance,

~Lyuokdea

How about Laplace Transforms? Recall that if:

[tex]\mathcal{L}\left[y(x)\right]=F(s)[/tex]

then:

[tex]\mathcal{L}\left[xy(x)\right]=-F^{'}(s)[/tex]

and:

[tex]\mathcal{L}\left[xy^{'}(x)\right]=-\frac{d}{ds}\mathcal{L}<br /> \left[y^{'}(x)\right]=-\frac{d}{ds}(sF(s)-y(0))[/tex]

rock and roll

Although you'll end up with a first order ODE in F(s) and the integrating factor may be messy so after that it might be tough unless the initial conditions are simple.

Edit: What are A, B, C, and D and the initial conditions?
 
Last edited:
Alright Lyuokdea I've looked at it. The integration becomes too difficult to analyze via Laplace Transform. I wish to change my recommendation: Use power series. :smile:
 
MalleusScientiarum said:
What you've found has to be wrong; it's a second order differential equation and you have three constants of integration. I would recommend trying the series solution again.

what do you mean three constants of integration? there are four indexing terms in the expression and all four constants appear. I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about.

~Lyuokdea
 
Lyuokdea said:
what do you mean three constants of integration? there are four indexing terms in the expression and all four constants appear. I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about.

~Lyuokdea
Only 3 indexing terms should appear. The initial conditions will give the first two terms, then the subsequent terms are generated from them.
 
I think that problem comes directly from the fact that there is a (Ct+D) in the y term. That leaves four different powers of t in the series a t^(n+1) from the y term down to a t^(n-2) from the y'' term. I'm not sure of a way to get it to not come out that way. Is there something special you are supposed to do to the (Ct + D)y to correct for that?

~Lyuokdea
 
Well, when I shift the index to obtain [itex]x^{n-2}[/itex] for all the summations, I get:

[tex]a_0: \quad\text{arbitrary}[/tex]

[tex]a_1: \quad\text{arbitrary}[/tex]

[tex]a_2=-\frac{Ba_1+Da_0}{2}[/tex]

[tex]n\geq 3:\quad a_n=-\frac{Aa_{n-2}(n-2)+Ba_{n-1}(n-1)+Ca_{n-3}+D a_{n-2}}{n(n-1)}[/tex]

Now, Lyuokdea if you want, you can verify that you get this, then plug it into Mathematica with selected values for all the constants, make sure it agrees with numerical results, then finally try and come up with a nice encapsulated expression for a summation if possible. I've already checked it for:

[tex]y^{''}+(t+1)y^{'}+(t+1)y=0;\quad y(0)=0,\quad y^{'}(0)=1[/tex]

Edit: Know what, this is the third time I correct typos in those expressions up there. Don't want to cause grief for anyone. I'm pretty sure it's correct now.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I think I got it all, thanks for the help everybody.

~Lyuokdea
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K