What is Elliptic pde: Definition and 13 Discussions

Second-order linear partial differential equations (PDEs) are classified as either elliptic, hyperbolic, or parabolic. Any second-order linear PDE in two variables can be written in the form




A

u

x
x


+
2
B

u

x
y


+
C

u

y
y


+
D

u

x


+
E

u

y


+
F
u
+
G
=
0
,



{\displaystyle Au_{xx}+2Bu_{xy}+Cu_{yy}+Du_{x}+Eu_{y}+Fu+G=0,\,}
where A, B, C, D, E, F, and G are functions of x and y and where




u

x


=




u



x





{\displaystyle u_{x}={\frac {\partial u}{\partial x}}}
,




u

x
y


=






2


u



x

y





{\displaystyle u_{xy}={\frac {\partial ^{2}u}{\partial x\partial y}}}
and similarly for




u

x
x


,

u

y


,

u

y
y




{\displaystyle u_{xx},u_{y},u_{yy}}
. A PDE written in this form is elliptic if





B

2



A
C
<
0
,


{\displaystyle B^{2}-AC<0,}
with this naming convention inspired by the equation for a planar ellipse.
The simplest nontrivial examples of elliptic PDE's are the Laplace equation,



Δ
u
=

u

x
x


+

u

y
y


=
0


{\displaystyle \Delta u=u_{xx}+u_{yy}=0}
, and the Poisson equation,



Δ
u
=

u

x
x


+

u

y
y


=
f
(
x
,
y
)
.


{\displaystyle \Delta u=u_{xx}+u_{yy}=f(x,y).}
In a sense, any other elliptic PDE in two variables can be considered to be a generalization of one of these equations, as it can always be put into the canonical form





u

x
x


+

u

y
y


+

(lower-order terms)

=
0


{\displaystyle u_{xx}+u_{yy}+{\text{ (lower-order terms)}}=0}
through a change of variables.

View More On Wikipedia.org
  1. Euge

    POTW A Nonlinear Elliptic PDE on a Bounded Domain

    Let ##D## be a smooth, bounded domain in ##\mathbb{R}^n## and ##f : D \to (0, \infty)## a continuous function. Prove that there exists no ##C^2##-solution ##u## of the nonlinear elliptic problem ##\Delta u^2 = f## in ##D##, ##u = 0## on ##\partial D##.
  2. E

    I Fredholm's alternative & L2 convergence

    Hello everyone, I'm currently going through Strauss "introduction to differential equations" and i can't get around a certain proof that he gives on chapter 11.5 page(327 (2nd edition)).Specifically, the proof refers to a certain version of Fredholm's alternative theorem. Assume that we are...
  3. R

    A Solution of a weakly formulated pde involving p-Laplacian

    Let $$f:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$$, where $$\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^d$$, and $$\Omega$$ is convex and bounded. Let $$\{x_i\}_{i=1,2,..N}$$ be a set of points in the interior of $$\Omega$$. $$d_i\in\mathbb{R}$,$i = 1,2,..N$$ I want to solve this weakly formulated pde: $$ 0=\frac{A}{N^{d+1}} \sum_i...
  4. P

    I Testing Elliptic PDE Solver with Non-Diagonal Metric

    Hello, I am working with numerical relativity and spectral methods. Recently I finished a general elliptic PDE solver using spectral methods, so now I want to do Physics with it. I am interested in solving the lapse equation, which fits into this category of PDEs $$ \nabla^2 \alpha = \alpha...
  5. ognik

    Investigating a Parabolic PDE algorithm

    Homework Statement Hi - I'm on the last chapter of this book and am a bit stuck. I am given a very basic fortran program (code attached in the zip file) and asked to 'investigate its accuracy and stability, for various values of Δt and lattice spacings'. The program is an implementation of the...
  6. ognik

    MHB Discretising Elliptic PDE in cylindrical coordinates

    Given an energy functional $ E=\int_{0}^{\infty} \,dr.r\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\d{\phi}{r}\right)^2 - S.\phi\right] $ I am told that discretizing on a lattice ri=ih (h=lattice size, i is i axis) leads to : $ 2{r}_{i}{\phi}_{i} - {r}_{i+\frac{1}{2}}{\phi}_{i+1} - {r}_{i-\frac{1}{2}}{\phi}_{i-1}...
  7. ognik

    MHB Discretising Elliptic PDE: How to Handle Derivatives and Summations?

    Hi, struggling to follow some text which later leads to computer algorithms for Elliptic PDEs... It reads: To derive a discrete approx. to the PDE based on the variational principle,. we 1st approx. E in terms of the values of the field at the lattice points and then vary w.r.t. them. The...
  8. E

    Using finite difference method for solving an elliptic PDE with MATLAB

    Homework Statement Given that we the following elliptic problem on a rectangular region: \nabla^2 T=0, \ (x,y)\in \Omega T(0,y)=300, \ T(4,y)=600, \ 0 \leq y \leq 2 \frac{\partial T}{\partial y}(x,0)=0, \frac{\partial T}{\partial y}(x,2) = 0, \ 0\leq x \leq 4 We want to solve this problem...
  9. T

    Corner signularity for elliptic PDE

    I'm using spectral element methods to numerical solve a non-linear pde D \psi = f\left(x,\psi \right) in a rectangular domain, with \psi = 0 Here D is a second order elliptic operator. I've found that the rate of convergence of my method depends on my choice of the functional form of...
  10. H

    DG method for nonlinear elliptic PDE

    Preface: just want to start by saying that I'm 99% sure I'm having a stability issue here in the way I'm implementing the time step since if I set \Delta t \ge 1 then for any stopping time > 1, the algorithm works as it should. For time steps smaller than 1, as the time step gets smaller and...
  11. F

    Coupled system of linear elliptic PDE

    Hi, I have a system of coupled PDE's as follows: A1 * (f,xx + f,yy) + B1 * (g,xx + g,yy) + C1 * f + D1 * g = 0 ; A2 * (f,xx + f,yy) + B2 * (g,xx + g,yy) + C2 * f + D2 * g = 0 ; where, f = f(x,y) and g = g(x,y) and ,xx = second partial derivative of the function wrt x and ,yy =...
  12. A

    Transforming an elliptic PDE into the Laplace equation?

    For an elliptic PDE Uxx + Uyy + Ux + Uy = -1 in D = {x^2 + y^2 = 1} and U = 0 on the boundary of D = {x^2 + y^2 = 1} is it possible for me to make a change of variables and eliminate the Ux and Uy and get the Laplace equation Uaa + Ubb = 0? I tried converting into polar coordinates, but the...
  13. maverick280857

    Solving an Elliptic PDE Using the Characteristic Equation: A Beginner's Guide

    Hello In our math course, we encountered the following elliptic PDE: y^{2}u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0 In order to solve it, we converted it to the characteristic equation, y^{2}\left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^{2} + 1 = 0 Next, we wrote: \frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{i}{y} My question is...
Back
Top