| New Reply |
Change in variables |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Jul26-12, 03:12 AM | #1 |
|
|
Change in variables
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
I am performing a change of variables, s --> t and am wondering can I just write g(s) --> g(t) or do I have to alter the function e.g. g(s) --> a*g(t). 2. Relevant equations s = (a/b)* t g(s) is to be found numerically and therefore we do not have it's definition. So Option one: just rewrite g(s) as g(t) Option two: g(s) = (a/b)*g(t) Thanks |
| Jul26-12, 05:26 AM | #2 |
|
|
Um, generally, if s -> t, then g(s) does NOT go to g(t). If you know that g is continuous, then you may assume that. Otherwise, you will have to work off the official definition of limits.
|
| Jul26-12, 06:13 AM | #3 |
|
|
I would assume that if s => ta /b, g(s) => g(ta/b) if a,b are arbitrary / real constants. I could be wrong though.
|
| Jul26-12, 06:37 AM | #4 |
|
|
Change in variables
That's definitely not true. Consider the function
g(x) = x + 1 for x > 0 and x - 1 for x <= 0. Then as s -> 0 from the right, g(x) => 1, even though g(0) = -1. |
| Jul26-12, 06:53 AM | #5 |
|
|
MathMonster, there are times when that is acceptable but I would avoid it. Technically if, for example, [itex]f(s)= s^2- 3s+ 2[/itex] then [itex]f(t)= t^2- 3t+ 2[/itex] but I don't believe that is what you are trying to do. If [itex]f(s)= s^2- 3s+ 2[/tex] then replacing s with t= s-2 gives, since s= t+2, [itex]f(s)= f(t+ 2)= (t+ 2)^2- 3(t+ 2)+ 2= t^2+ 4t+ 4- 3t- 6+ 2= t^2+ t[/tex] but notice that is f(t+2), not f(t). If you like you say explicitely that g(t)= f(t+ 2) and then use g(t). |
| Jul26-12, 07:35 AM | #6 |
|
|
I see - my apologies. Nevertheless, you should not be moving constants out of expressions, g(at/b) =/= (a/b) * g(t). So unless you would like to simply g(t) with some change of variable (again, this as the above advised, this is not suggested - there are many scenarios where this is invalid - an introductory book on Real Analysis can help clarify the conditions under which you may do so), there isn't too much of a point of doing so.
|
| Jul30-12, 04:59 AM | #7 |
|
|
Hi!
Thank you for the reply! Yes I am talking about a change in variables not limits - sorry that's my fault I didn't think of the notation I was using. HallsofIvy - thank you! I thought that was the case but was confused how to so it. Basically i've got a function g(s+) and g(s-) and a relation linking s+ & s-. I then have a formula with the two 'g's' in which I need to write as s+ in order to solve it. So basically, I will just write g(s-) = g((a/b)*s+) and leave it at that? There's a bit of differentiation that will come in which will take into account the change. Thanks! |
| Jul30-12, 08:16 AM | #8 |
|
|
Could you possibly post the question you are working on?
|
| New Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: Change in variables
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Using change of variables to change PDE to form with no second order derivatives | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 1 | ||
| PDE 2Ux + 3Uy + U = 0 with change of variables V(x,y)=ln[U(x,y)] | Differential Equations | 4 | ||
| Change of variables | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 1 | ||
| 3D Change of Variables | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 2 | ||
| Change of variables. | Calculus | 3 | ||