2D Laplacian in polar coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the 2D Laplacian in polar coordinates, specifically focusing on the separation of variables method applied to the angular component of the Laplacian. Participants explore boundary conditions and the implications for the eigenvalue parameter, lambda.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the form of the 2D Laplacian in polar coordinates and discusses the separation of variables approach for the angular part, leading to a differential equation for ##\Theta(\theta)##.
  • Another participant notes the necessity of satisfying the boundary conditions ##\Theta(0) = \Theta(2\pi)## and ##\Theta'(0) = \Theta'(2\pi)##, suggesting that these conditions restrict lambda to a discrete set for non-trivial solutions.
  • There is a mention of the missing ##\lambda=0## solution, indicating that it may also be relevant to the discussion.
  • A later reply questions whether the condition ##\Theta^{(n)}(0) = \Theta^{(n)}(2\pi)## holds true, which is affirmed as following from the differential equation if the other conditions are satisfied.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for boundary conditions to determine the eigenvalues, but the implications of these conditions and the completeness of the solutions remain a point of discussion. There is no consensus on the treatment of the ##\lambda=0## solution or the specific implications of the boundary conditions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of the solutions and the boundary conditions that may not be fully explored, particularly regarding the implications of the ##\lambda=0## case and the completeness of the eigenvalue spectrum.

Mayan Fung
Messages
131
Reaction score
14
The 2D Laplacian in polar coordinates has the form of
$$ \frac{1}{r}(ru_r)_r +\frac{1}{r^2}u_{\theta \theta} =0 $$
By separation of variables, we can write the ## \theta## part as
$$ \Theta'' (\theta) = \lambda \Theta (\theta)$$

Now, the book said because we need to satisfy the condition ## \Theta (0)=\Theta (2\pi)##, ##\lambda = n^2## with n =1,2,3...

I tried this in detailed steps.
##\Theta (\theta) = Acos\sqrt{\lambda}\theta + Bcos\sqrt{\lambda}\theta##
With the BC,
## B = Acos(\sqrt{\lambda}2\pi) + Bsin(\sqrt{\lambda}2\pi) ##
This is just an equality but not an identity. Why can't I conclude that
## B = \frac{cos(\sqrt{\lambda}2\pi)}{1-sin(\sqrt{\lambda}2\pi)} A ##
instead of imposing constraint on ##\lambda##

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because you also need to satisfy ##\Theta'(0) = \Theta'(2\pi)##. For general lambda that gives you a system of equations that lead to trivial solutions only. Only for a discrete set of lambda do you get non-trivial solutions.

Note: You are missing the ##\lambda=0## solution.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mayan Fung
Orodruin said:
Because you also need to satisfy ##\Theta'(0) = \Theta'(2\pi)##. For general lambda that gives you a system of equations that lead to trivial solutions only. Only for a discrete set of lambda do you get non-trivial solutions.

Note: You are missing the ##\lambda=0## solution.
Thank you! Is it also true that ##\Theta^{(n)}(0)=\Theta^{(n)}(2\pi)##?
 
Chan Pok Fung said:
Thank you! Is it also true that ##\Theta^{(n)}(0)=\Theta^{(n)}(2\pi)##?

That follows from the differential equation if you have the other two.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mayan Fung

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K