Troubleshooting First Order ODE Conversions

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the correct approach to converting a second-order ordinary differential equation (ODE) into a system of first-order ODEs. It emphasizes that only variables up to one order less than the original ODE should be introduced, specifically noting that the variable for the second derivative should not be included. Participants stress the importance of expressing the new system entirely in terms of the new variables, without retaining any original variables. The conversation highlights that this type of problem is commonly found in textbooks, and students should refer to these resources for guidance. Ultimately, the thread underscores the need for clarity in understanding the conversion process rather than simply seeking answers.
LSMOG
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Moved from a technical forum, so homework template missing
What am I doing wrong here in my attachment?
 

Attachments

  • 15270592973801975924065.jpg
    15270592973801975924065.jpg
    12.6 KB · Views: 462
Physics news on Phys.org
I'll be nice and write it out for you, but this is something that you should have done yourself instead of posting a picture:
$$
2 y'' -5 y' + y = 0
$$
You then set ##x_1 = y##, ##x_2 = y'## and ##x_3 = y''##.

First off, that ##x_3## shouldn't be there. You only introduce new variables up to one order less than the ODE.

Second, when you start writing the new set of ODEs, you must write everything in terms of the new variables, so there shouldn't be any ##y##'s left.
 
Thanks a lot, thanks again
 
You are not doing something wrong because you're not really doing anything!
I don't know what other helpers think, but every now and then we get here question on a very standard problem the answer or solution method to which is the first chapter, or the first page of a chapter in any textbook on the subject. Helpers are not here to re-write the textbooks but to help out with difficulties or confusions in understanding points or difficulties students run into trying to apply the methods.

I assume you can actually solve this equation? That will be a useful check and background. The question is asking you to solve it in a particular way. It Ii almost telling you the way when it says ' convert to first-order o.d.e.'. A first order (homogeneous linear with constant coefficients) ode is something of the form
(aD + B)f(y) = 0 where D stands for d/dx and you have to find a, b, f . f(y) = 0 is another first-order ode.
Doing this is called "factorisation of the operator". You will find it in plenty of books and online sources. If you consider first some elementary examples (your example is not quite the easiest) you will begin to see this as a natural thing to do, not something taken out of a hat. If you apply the "operator" (aD + b) to a first order differential equation, you will get a second order differential equation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Mark44
epenguin said:
The question is asking you to solve it in a particular way. It Ii almost telling you the way when it says ' convert to first-order o.d.e.'.
The thread title betrays some misunderstanding: "Convert to a first order ODE".
You can't convert a second-order ODE to a first-order ODE, but you can convert a second-order ODE into a system of two first-order differential equations.

epenguin said:
Helpers are not here to re-write the textbooks but to help out with difficulties or confusions in understanding points or difficulties students run into trying to apply the methods.
I agree. Your first resource should be your textbook, which almost certainly has an example of a problem like this.
 
Thanks and I am sorry colleagues
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K