Recent content by sardel

Ah ok, thank you very much.

Oops... Actually, I think I get f_1(t)=0 for all t\in [a,b]. But I want to conclude somthing about \gamma, right? I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the way I am thinking about this.

Thank you. By doing this, I end up with \gamma_1(t)=0 for all t\in[a,b] and analogously for \gamma_2,\ldots\gamma_k. Making (0,\ldots,0) the only stationary point of \Phi. Is this correct?

The relevant chapter is available at www.math.ku.dk/~solovej/MATFYS/MatFys2.pdf

The lecture notes are available here: http://www.math.ku.dk/~solovej/MATFYS/MatFys2.pdf" . All the other chapters are available as MatFys1.pdf through MatFys6.pdf, and the directory listing can be viewed for the directory /MATFYS/ The exercise I am trying to solve is Exercise 2.6 and...

No love for functionals? I should probably say that the definition of stationary points given in the lecture notes is If \Phi is a differential functional on D_{\Phi}=C^1([a,b];\mathbb{R}^k) we call \gamma\in D_{\Phi} a stationary point of \Phi if the differential d\Phi_{\gamma} vanishes on...

Hello guys. This is my first post at physics forums, so please be gentle :) I am trying to understand functionals, so I am solving as many exercises from these lecture notes that I downloaded. Homework Statement Let f:[a,b]\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^k be a continuous function and define...