Are There Infinite Eigenfunctions with Distinct Eigenvalues for y''+λy=0?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Combinatus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalues
Combinatus
Messages
40
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Show that y''+\lambda y=0 with the initial conditions y(0)=y(\pi)+y'(\pi)=0 has an infinite sequence of eigenfunctions with distinct eigenvalues. Identify the eigenvalues explicitly.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



\lambda \le 0 seems to yield the trivial solution, so \lambda > 0. The general solution is then y=A\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)} + B\cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)}. The first initial condition gives y=A\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)}, and then the second gives A(\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}) = 0.

I've tried to solve \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}= 0 for \lambda by writing the LHS as a single sine function, and separately by dividing with \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}, but neither approach seems to give a good way of giving an explicit formula for \lambda.

(The best I've been able to do with the single sine function is to write \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} as \sqrt{1+\lambda} \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x + \delta)}. Consequently, \lambda = \left(\dfrac{\pi k - \delta}{\pi}\right)^2, k \in \mathbb{N}. But then \delta = \arccos \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\lambda}} = \arcsin \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{\sqrt{1+\lambda}}, so I wouldn't call this explicit.)

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Combinatus said:

Homework Statement



Show that y''+\lambda y=0 with the initial conditions y(0)=y(\pi)+y'(\pi)=0 has an infinite sequence of eigenfunctions with distinct eigenvalues. Identify the eigenvalues explicitly.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



\lambda \le 0 seems to yield the trivial solution, so \lambda > 0. The general solution is then y=A\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)} + B\cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)}. The first initial condition gives y=A\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x)}, and then the second gives A(\sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}) = 0.

I've tried to solve \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}= 0 for \lambda by writing the LHS as a single sine function, and separately by dividing with \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)}, but neither approach seems to give a good way of giving an explicit formula for \lambda.

(The best I've been able to do with the single sine function is to write \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} + \sqrt{\lambda} \cos{(\sqrt{\lambda} \pi)} as \sqrt{1+\lambda} \sin{(\sqrt{\lambda} x + \delta)}. Consequently, \lambda = \left(\dfrac{\pi k - \delta}{\pi}\right)^2, k \in \mathbb{N}. But then \delta = \arccos \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\lambda}} = \arcsin \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{\sqrt{1+\lambda}}, so I wouldn't call this explicit.)

Thoughts?

That looks well done. You don't need the ##\sqrt{1+\lambda}## in the answer though. You can just write your final eigenfunction$$
y_n = \sin(\frac{n\pi - \delta}{\pi}x)$$When you write something like this up, it smooths things out a bit if you do this case as ##\lambda = \mu^2 >0## and carry the ##\mu## through to the end. It reads nicer without all the square root signs.
 
LCKurtz said:
That looks well done. You don't need the ##\sqrt{1+\lambda}## in the answer though. You can just write your final eigenfunction$$
y_n = \sin(\frac{n\pi - \delta}{\pi}x)$$When you write something like this up, it smooths things out a bit if you do this case as ##\lambda = \mu^2 >0## and carry the ##\mu## through to the end. It reads nicer without all the square root signs.
Thanks for your input! I'm still a bit uncomfortable with u_n = \sin\left(\dfrac{n\pi - \delta}{\pi}x\right) as \delta depends on \lambda, though. I tried a few additional approaches, but I haven't been able to get anything "better" than that.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top