image
Physics Forums Logo
image
image
* Register * Upgrade Blogs Library Staff Rules Mark Forums Read
image
image   image
image

image Wronskian Proof Share It Thread Tools Search this Thread image
Old May4-05, 11:47 AM                  #1
dogma

dogma is Offline:
Posts: 35
Wronskian Proof

Hello out there.

I'm working on a proof by induction of the Wronskian and need a little boost to get going.

So, here goes:

If LaTeX Code: y_1,...,y_n \\in C^n[a,b] , then their Wronskian is:

LaTeX Code: Wr(y_1,...,y_n)=det\\left(\\begin{array}{ccc}y_1&\\cd  ots&y_n\\\\y_1\\prime&\\cdots&y_n\\prime\\\\\\vdots&\\vdots  &\\vdots\\\\y_1^{(n-1)}&\\cdots&y_n^{(n-1)}\\end{array}\\right)

In general, a set of functions will be linearly independent IFF the Wronskian is not identically zero.

Prove this for n = 2, that is LaTeX Code: f(x), g(x) are independent IFF

LaTeX Code: \\left\\vert\\begin{array}{cc}f(x)&g(x)\\\\f^\\prime(x)&  g^\\prime(x)\\end{array}\\right\\vert is not identically zero.

Okay, I think I understand how to prove this in one direction. That is, assuming the LaTeX Code: Wr(f,g) \\neq 0 and showing that LaTeX Code: f(x), g(x) are independent.

But I'm a little stuck in the assumptions for proving the other direction.

This is what I have for the proof in one direction:

Assume LaTeX Code: Wr(f(x),g(x)) \\neq 0 .

Then there exists some LaTeX Code: x_o such that LaTeX Code: Wr(f(x_o),g(x_o)) \\neq 0 .

Assume:
LaTeX Code: c_1 f(x) + c_2 g(x) \\equiv 0
LaTeX Code: c_1 f^\\prime(x) + c_2 g^\\prime(x) \\equiv 0

then
LaTeX Code: c_1 f(x_o) + c_2 g(x_o) = 0
LaTeX Code: c_1 f^\\prime(x_o) + c_2 g^\\prime(x_o) = 0

We have two equations in the unknowns LaTeX Code: c_1 and LaTeX Code:  c_2 .

LaTeX Code: \\left \\vert \\begin{array}{cc}f(x_o) & g(x_o) \\\\ f^ \\prime (x_o) & g ^\\prime (x_o) \\end{array} \\right \\vert \\neq 0

Therefore there are unique solutions.

One such solution is: LaTeX Code: c_1 = c_2 = 0

This turns out to be the only solution.

Therefore LaTeX Code: f(x) and LaTeX Code: g(x) are independent.


I'm sure my wording is a little off. But I'm still confused about how I would prove it the other way.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Best,
dogma
  Reply With Quote
Old May4-05, 05:37 PM                  #2
HallsofIvy

PF Mentor

HallsofIvy is Offline:
Posts: 26,829
Looks good to me.

And the other way is easier!

Suppose f and g are NOT independent. Then there exist a, b such that af(x)+ bg(x)= 0 for all x. If b is not 0, then g(x)= (a/b)f(x) and the Wronskian if f(x)g'(x)- f'(x)g(x)= f(x)(b/a)f'(x)- f'(x)(b/a)f(x)= (b/a)(f(x)f'(x)- f'(x)f(x))= 0 for all x.

(If b is 0, then f(x) must be identically 0 so the Wronskian is 0(g'(x))- 0(g(x))= 0.)
  Reply With Quote
Old May5-05, 05:52 AM                  #3
dogma

dogma is Offline:
Posts: 35
Thanks, Mr. Ivy!

That makes things a lot clearer! I can see the light.

Best,
dogma
  Reply With Quote
Old May5-05, 12:01 PM                  #4
kleinwolf

kleinwolf is Offline:
Posts: 310
Ok, so Ivy proved the way you wanted : (Linearly dependent)->Wr(x)=0 forall x

The problem is that : this is equivalent to "exists t Wr(t)!=0->Lin independent" which is what dogma proved.

Since you said it's IFF, then remains to prove :

"Lin indep->exists t Wr(t)!=0" which is equivalent to "W(x)=0 \forall x->lin dep"

Since W(x)=0=f(x)g'(x)-f'(x)g(x).

If f(x)!=0 and g(x)!=0 for a certain domain of x...then clearly f(x)=Cg(x) from the diff. equ...(f'/f)=(g'/g)...but only on this domain

If exist a domain with f(y)=0, f'(y)=0 then g(x) can be anything

Hence the theorem is only in one direction since you can find f,g lin indep such that Wr(f,g)=0 forall x

For counterexample :

LaTeX Code:  f(x)=\\left\\{\\begin{array}{cc} 0 & |x|\\leq 1\\\\ (x+1)^2(x-1)^2 & else\\end{array}\\right.
LaTeX Code:  g(x)=(x-1)^2(x+1)^2

Then cleary f,g are in C^1(R) :

LaTeX Code:  fsingle-quote(x)=\\left\\{\\begin{array}{cc} 0 & |x|\\leq 1 \\\\4x(x-1)(x+1) & |x|\\geq 1\\end{array}\\right.

You see that f'(\pm 1+)=0=f'(\pm 1-) so f'(x) is continuous on R.

If |x|<1 then W=0 clearly since f=0
if |x|>1 then W=0 clearly since f,g are dep on |x|>1

However f and g are lin indep on R, since if f-g=0 on |x|>1 then f-g!=0 in [-1;1]
  Reply With Quote
image image
Reply
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: Wronskian Proof
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proof: Compare two integral(Please look at my surgested proof) Hummingbird25 Calculus & Beyond 11 Feb27-08 05:00 PM
Wronskian kasse Calculus & Beyond 7 Sep27-07 11:08 AM
3rd order differential eqn (wronskian) glitchy Calculus & Beyond 2 Mar11-07 03:10 PM
Wronskian problem Gale Differential Equations 6 Mar1-05 06:57 PM

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. © 2010 Physics Forums
Sciam | physorgPhysorg.com Science News Partner
image
image   image