D'Alembert's solution to the wave equation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bksree
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wave Wave equation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around D'Alembert's solution to the wave equation, specifically focusing on the differentiation of this solution and the introduction of new variables, ##\xi## and ##\eta##. Participants seek clarification on the mathematical steps involved in the differentiation process and the implications of these variables.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests an explanation of a conclusion made in a textbook regarding the differentiation of D'Alembert's solution.
  • Another participant finds the introduction of the variables ##\xi## and ##\eta## confusing and explains the differentiation using the chain rule.
  • A participant questions how it is concluded that the partial derivatives with respect to ##\xi## and ##\eta## correspond to the derivatives with respect to ##x##.
  • One participant confirms that the derivative of ##f## with respect to ##(x+vt)## is equivalent to the partial derivative with respect to ##x## when evaluated at ##t = 0##.
  • A later reply clarifies that the relationship holds for any time ##t## and reiterates the application of the chain rule in the context of the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to have differing levels of understanding regarding the differentiation process and the roles of the new variables. There is no consensus on the clarity of the explanation or the conclusions drawn from the differentiation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the application of the chain rule and the treatment of variables in the context of partial differentiation, which may not be fully resolved.

bksree
Messages
75
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
It is concluded that
df/d zeta = df/dx and df/d eta = dg/dx
Will someone explain how this conclusion is made while differentiating
Hi
On page 81 of the book "A student's guide to waves by Fleisch and Kinneman a conclusion is made while differentiating D Alembert's solution to the wave equation.
Will someone explain this please ? The details are in the attachment

TIA
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
I find the introduction of ##\xi## and ##\eta## as confusing. It's simply the chain rule of differentiation:
$$\partial_t y(t,x)=\partial_t [f(x+v t)+g(x+v t)]=v f'(x+v t)-v g'(x+v t),$$
where ##f'## is the derivative of the function ##f:\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}## wrt. to its argument.
 
Hi
Thank you.
My doubt is :
How is it concluded that (all partial derivatives) df/dξ = df/dx and df/dη = dg/dx

TIA
 
Of course you have
$$f'(x+v t)=\partial_x f(x+v t)$$
etc...
 
Thanks again for your time.
Is this what you mean ?
∂ f/∂ ξ = ∂ f/∂ (x+vt)
= ∂f /∂ x at t = 0

TIA
 
Last edited:
It's valid for any ##t##. Note that the independent two variables in the problem are ##t## and ##x##, and thus ##\partial_x## means the derivative of a function wrt. ##x## with ##t## hold constant. It's all just the chain rule. Writing
$$f(t,x)=f[\xi(t,x)]$$
you have
$$\partial_t f(t,x)=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi} f[\xi(t,x)] \partial_t \xi, \quad \partial_x f(t,x)=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi} f[\xi(t,x)] \partial_x \xi.$$
Now take
$$\xi(t,x)=x+v t.$$
NB: Note that there's a comfortable LaTeX editor in PF (using mathJax), which gives much better readable math:

https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
270