Continuity of Green's function

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the continuity of Green's function and its derivative in the context of a specific mathematical relation involving differential equations. Participants explore the implications of continuity and discontinuity in Green's function and its derivative, examining both theoretical and practical aspects of the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why Green's function (G) and its derivative cannot be continuous in the given relation as epsilon approaches zero.
  • Others argue that while G and its derivative can be continuous, this continuity does not hold as epsilon approaches zero due to the behavior of the terms involved.
  • A participant suggests that allowing a discontinuity in G's derivative at x = t seems arbitrary and proposes that a discontinuity in G could also be a solution.
  • Another participant counters that a discontinuity in G would not resolve the issue, as the integral would still approach zero.
  • Some participants reference examples of functions that are continuous but have discontinuous derivatives, such as f(x) = |x|, to illustrate that this situation is not unusual.
  • A participant introduces a piecewise representation of G and discusses its implications for the differential equation, suggesting that this approach may provide a clearer understanding of the problem.
  • There is a discussion about the complexity of inserting the piecewise function into the differential equation and the resulting expressions, with some participants expressing confusion about the simplification process.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of correctly handling the properties of the delta function and its derivatives in the context of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the continuity of G and its derivative, with no consensus reached on the best approach to handle the discontinuities or the implications of the proposed solutions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the mathematical expressions involved and the need for careful handling of delta functions and their derivatives, indicating that the discussion may be limited by the assumptions made in the mathematical framework.

Wledig
Messages
69
Reaction score
1
Why can't G and its derivative be continuous in the relation below?

$$p(x)\dfrac{dG}{dx} \Big|_{t-\epsilon}^{t+\epsilon} +\int_{t-\epsilon}^{t+\epsilon} q(x) \;G(x,t) dx = 1$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They can, but not if it is to hold as ##\epsilon \to 0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wledig
Yes, I realized that. Both terms would vanish if that was the case, however the way this situation is avoided by letting dG/dx have a discontinuity at x = t seems rather arbitrary. Couldn't the same be accomplished by letting G have a discontinuity in t? I guess I just find a bit awkward to let G be continuous but not its derivative, not sure if this is a condition that should hold true.
 
Wledig said:
Couldn't the same be accomplished by letting G have a discontinuity in t?
No, that would not help. The integral would still go to zero.

Wledig said:
I guess I just find a bit awkward to let G be continuous but not its derivative, not sure if this is a condition that should hold true.
This is really not a strange thing. There are many examples of sich functions. For example ##f(x) = |x|##.

Still, I can relate to your worries and I also never liked this argument although it does its job in the end. My preferred argument, and the one I use in my book, is to write ##G## as a piecewise function ##G(x,x’) = \theta(x-x’)g_1(x) + \theta(x’-x)g_2(x)## and insert this into the differential equation using that ##\theta’## is a delta function. You will need some delta function properties, but once the smoke clears you will obtain exactly the same result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wledig
Orodruin said:
This is really not a strange thing. There are many examples of sich functions. For example f(x)=|x|f(x)=|x|f(x) = |x|.
You're right, I completely forgot this classic example.
Orodruin said:
Still, I can relate to your worries and I also never liked this argument although it does its job in the end. My preferred argument, and the one I use in my book, is to write GGG as a piecewise function G(x,x′)=θ(x−x′)g1(x)+θ(x′−x)g2(x)G(x,x′)=θ(x−x′)g1(x)+θ(x′−x)g2(x)G(x,x’) = \theta(x-x’)g_1(x) + \theta(x’-x)g_2(x) and insert this into the differential equation using that θ′θ′\theta’ is a delta function. You will need some delta function properties, but once the smoke clears you will obtain exactly the same result.
That's actually a much more natural way of thinking about the problem, since the derivative of the step function is Dirac's delta, we're just left with the boundary conditions. I just wonder how to reach the relation below from it though. $$ \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \left( \dfrac{dG}{dx} \Big|_{x=t+\epsilon} - \dfrac{dG}{dx} \Big|_{x=t-\epsilon} \right) = \dfrac{1}{p(t)} $$
 
What do you get when you do the insertion into your differential equation?
 
Sorry, I'm confused. I tried inserting it into ##\dfrac{d}{dx}\left(p(x)\dfrac{dG}{dx}\right)+q(x)G=\delta(x-t)## but I got a pretty long expression in return that didn't seem like it could be simplified into anything that would help me reach the relation. Am I following your line of thought correctly? Maybe I misunderstood something.
 
Wledig said:
Am I following your line of thought correctly?
It is impossible to know that unless you actually show us what you got.
 
Alright, here's what I got:
$$ p[(g''_1 \theta(x-x') + 2g'_1 \delta(x-x') + g_1 \delta(x-x')') + (g''_2 \theta(x'-x) + 2g'_2 \delta(x'-x) + g_2 \delta(x'-x)')] + p'(g'_1 \theta(x-x') + g'_2\theta(x'-x) + g_1 \delta(x-x') + g_2 \delta(x'-x)) + q(g_1 \theta(x-x') + g_2\theta(x'-x)) = \delta(x-x')$$
Now, I looked it up that the derivative of the delta function is ##\frac{\delta}{x}## so I could substitute it there, but it doesn't seem to lead anywhere. I also thought about isolating ##\frac{dG}{dx}## and inserting in the other terms to come up with something, but that didn't seem to work either.
 
  • #10
The derivative of the ##\delta## is a separate distribution in and of itself. It does not really make sense to say that it is ##\delta/x##. Its exact properties are not important at the moment, but know that it is separate from the delta itself. Before you take the second derivative, note that ##f(x) \delta(x-x') = f(x') \delta(x-x')##. That will save you some annoying cross terms that are a bit tricky to handle. After that, start collecting terms with the same factors of ##\theta##, ##\delta##, or ##\delta'## and identify it with the corresponding terms on the right-hand side.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wledig

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K