Can someone explain this to me please?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AdrianZ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explain
AdrianZ
Messages
318
Reaction score
0
I'm asking this integral equation (I'm not sure if it's an integral equation or not by it's a problem in my ODE book and because it has an integral in it I called it that way). anyways, this is the problem:

y=\int^{x}_{1}ty(t)dt

I differentiated y with respect to x and I turned that equation into this ODE: y'=xy
Solving this ODE yields y=Ce^{x^2/2}

But from the definition of y, it is clear that y(1)=0 while my solution suggests that y=e1/2.

Then I substituted y(t)=Cex2 in the original equation and I obtained:
y=\int^{x}_{1}tCe^{t^2/2}dt → y=C(e^{t^2/2})|^{x}_{1}→y=C(e^{x^2/}-e^{1/2})
And in this case y(1) is indeed equal to 0.

Would someone explain why the y that is obtained from the ODE solution tells me that y(1)≠0? What's wrong in my solution?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Any ideas on this matter will be appreciated. Are my questions really that hard that they usually get no responses back on physics forum or there's a conspiracy against me? lol.
 
The condition y(1)=0 is given in order to find constant.THE PURPOSE OF GIVING BOUNDARY CONDITIONS IS TO OBTAIN CONSTANTS AFTER INTEGRATION.
 
AdrianZ said:
I'm asking this integral equation (I'm not sure if it's an integral equation or not by it's a problem in my ODE book and because it has an integral in it I called it that way). anyways, this is the problem:

y=\int^{x}_{1}ty(t)dt

I differentiated y with respect to x and I turned that equation into this ODE: y'=xy
Solving this ODE yields y=Ce^{x^2/2}

But from the definition of y, it is clear that y(1)=0 while my solution suggests that y=e1/2.

Then I substituted y(t)=Cex2 in the original equation and I obtained:
y=\int^{x}_{1}tCe^{t^2/2}dt → y=C(e^{t^2/2})|^{x}_{1}→y=C(e^{x^2/}-e^{1/2})
And in this case y(1) is indeed equal to 0.

Would someone explain why the y that is obtained from the ODE solution tells me that y(1)≠0? What's wrong in my solution?

"In order to solve this you need to know what value of t... x and 1 correspond to and then you can go from there. If you keep it in terms of t, you get the same function, but t^2, x^2.

Knowing that x=t, at y=?, and t=0, y=?, you can transform accordingly .

This an ODe, you you don't have what y=, when x=t, t=0, etc.

YS
 
I guess I've already found an explanation to this.
C must be zero. probably that's the only answer this integral equation can have. other answers would lead to contradiction.
 
There is the following linear Volterra equation of the second kind $$ y(x)+\int_{0}^{x} K(x-s) y(s)\,{\rm d}s = 1 $$ with kernel $$ K(x-s) = 1 - 4 \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \dfrac{1}{\lambda_n^2} e^{-\beta \lambda_n^2 (x-s)} $$ where $y(0)=1$, $\beta>0$ and $\lambda_n$ is the $n$-th positive root of the equation $J_0(x)=0$ (here $n$ is a natural number that numbers these positive roots in the order of increasing their values), $J_0(x)$ is the Bessel function of the first kind of zero order. I...
Are there any good visualization tutorials, written or video, that show graphically how separation of variables works? I particularly have the time-independent Schrodinger Equation in mind. There are hundreds of demonstrations out there which essentially distill to copies of one another. However I am trying to visualize in my mind how this process looks graphically - for example plotting t on one axis and x on the other for f(x,t). I have seen other good visual representations of...
Back
Top