Solvability v.s. the existance of a solution for nonlinear ODE's

  • Thread starter Thread starter pergradus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nonlinear
AI Thread Summary
In discussions about nonlinear ordinary differential equations (ODEs), it is noted that while analytical solutions are often deemed impossible, this does not imply that no analytical solutions exist at all. The difficulty lies in the fact that most functions encountered in practice are part of a limited subset with closed-form representations, which only satisfy a small number of equations. Consequently, many nonlinear ODEs lack closed-form solutions, leading to reliance on numerical methods for resolution. The distinction between solvability and the existence of a solution is crucial, as it raises questions about the potential for discovering well-defined functions that could satisfy these equations. Ultimately, the existence of analytical solutions remains an open question, despite the challenges in finding them.
pergradus
Messages
137
Reaction score
1
In physics we're told often that there is no analytical way to solve most nonlinear differential equations (I don't know if this can be proven or not, or it's just assumed because no one has found a way to do it), so we use a computer to solve them numerically.

I'm wondering though, assuming it is impossible to solve a differential equation by analytical means, does that mean that there is no analytical solution which exists? That is, could you somehow guess some well-defined function that satisfies the nonlinear equation, even if there's no way of directly solving the equation for it?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In many cases (most, actually) there just doesn't exist a solution in closed form. The functions you're used to (i.e. functions that have closed form representations) are only a very small subset of all the possible functions; it's natural that they would satisfy only a small subset of PDE's and ODE's.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top