A Harmonic Function is Zero on an open portion of the boundary, help

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a harmonic function that is zero on an open portion of its boundary, with its normal derivative also being zero on that same boundary segment. The original poster seeks to demonstrate that the function is zero throughout the entire region, expressing frustration over their inability to find a solution after extensive effort.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers the implications of the gradient being zero on the boundary and references the Cauchy-Kowalevski theorem, questioning its applicability. Other participants introduce Gronwall's inequality, although one later dismisses its relevance, indicating a mix of serious inquiry and lighthearted commentary.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring various ideas and approaches. There is a lack of consensus on the direction of the solution, and some responses appear to diverge from the original problem's intent.

Contextual Notes

The original poster is working within the constraints of a homework assignment, which may impose specific rules or expectations regarding the problem-solving process.

lackrange
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
A harmonic function in a region is zero on an open portion of the boundary, and its normal derivative is also zero on the same part, and it is continuously differentiable on the boundary. I have to show that the function is zero everywhere, but I have no idea how. I have tried this for hours and hours, and haven't come up with anything useful. The best answer I've had so far involves the Cauchy Kovelevskaya theorem, but that was shown to be flawed. Can anyone help? This is very difficult..

I'm pretty sure this implies the gradient is zero on the boundary, is there anything I can possible do with that?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi lackrange,

This is actually a pretty easy corollary to Gronwall's inequality. Just play around with parameters β as shown on the wikipedia page
 
Actually I'm just trolling, I think Gronwall's inequality is completely irrelevant to this problem but it has a really cool name. This post came up after a google search on the day before my takehome midterm was due, and I assumed you were writing the same takehome as me since that question was on the test. I didn't think it was fair that you were asking people on the internet to solve your takehome midterm for you so I posted that reply as as joke.

... This didn't turn out as funny as I expected since I thought you'd reply asking me what the hell Gronwall's inequality has anything to do with this and then I'd tell you that it was all a joke. So I'm sorry if this caused any confusion to anyone, mods feel free to delete these two posts.
 
Do you guys know the solution finally?
 

Similar threads

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