Differentiate hyperbolic function

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the differential equation (1 + x^2)y'' + xy' - y = 0, given that lny = sinh^(-1)(x). Participants emphasize the importance of correctly applying differentiation rules, particularly the product and chain rules, when deriving y' and y''. Suggestions include simplifying the expressions to avoid unnecessary complexity and ensuring accurate differentiation of the inverse hyperbolic sine function. The conversation highlights the iterative process of refining the solution based on feedback and clarifying the approach to substituting y' and y'' back into the original equation. Ultimately, the thread concludes with a sense of progress in understanding the problem-solving direction.
DryRun
Gold Member
Messages
837
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
If lny = sinh^(-1)(x), prove that

(1+ x^2)y'' + xy' - y = 0

The attempt at a solution

I have tried various (unsuccessful) ways of doing this, but the basic procedure that I've done is:

D.w.r.t.x for lny = sinh^(-1)(x)

This gives: (1/y)y' = 1/(1 + x^2)

To obtain y'', d.w.r.t.x for equation above.

This is the part where I'm not sure if i should use product rule for differentiating (1/y)y'

Is is correct?
-y^(-2)y' + y^(-1)y''

Or is this the right way of doing it?
-y^(-2)y''
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sharks said:
This is the part where I'm not sure if i should use product rule for differentiating (1/y)y'

Is is correct?
-y^(-2)y' + y^(-1)y''

Or is this the right way of doing it?
-y^(-2)y''

You must use the product (or quotient) rule.
 
Well, you should be aware that:
sinh^{-1}x=log(x+\sqrt{x^2+1})

so you have
\log y=\log(x+\sqrt{x^2+1})

from now on it should be simple.
 
You differentiate sinh-1 x incorrectly. You should have
\frac{y'}{y} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+x^2}}Then I'd get rid of the quotients to make things simpler:
y'\sqrt{1+x^2} = ybefore differentiating. (I just never really liked the quotient rule.)
 
Last edited:
I have taken into account all of your advices. OK, now here's the evolution of this problem from my side.

So, making y' the subject of formula, i get y' = y/[(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]

I further differentiate w.r.t.x the equation by vela above (i apologize for not using the better-looking LaTex, but i still have a lot to learn on how to use it):

So, y''(1 + x^2)^(1/2) + y'/[2(1 + x^2)^(1/2)] = y'

Now, i make y'' the subject of formula.

y'' = {y' - y'/[2(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]}/[(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]

Then, i replace y' and y'' above, into the original equation: (1+ x^2)y'' + xy' - y, hoping that it will all reduce to 0. After substituting, i will end up with a (rather long) equation involving x, y and y' (which i have to substitute again). Is this the right direction to solve this problem?
 
sharks said:
I have taken into account all of your advices. OK, now here's the evolution of this problem from my side.

So, making y' the subject of formula, i get y' = y/[(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]

I further differentiate w.r.t.x the equation by vela above (i apologize for not using the better-looking LaTex, but i still have a lot to learn on how to use it):

So, y''(1 + x^2)^(1/2) + y'/[2(1 + x^2)^(1/2)] = y'
You need to use the chain rule when calculating the second term.
Now, i make y'' the subject of formula.

y'' = {y' - y'/[2(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]}/[(1 + x^2)^(1/2)]

Then, i replace y' and y'' above, into the original equation: (1+ x^2)y'' + xy' - y, hoping that it will all reduce to 0. After substituting, i will end up with a (rather long) equation involving x, y and y' (which i have to substitute again). Is this the right direction to solve this problem?
You're making more work for yourself than you need to.

Hint: After you differentiated, the y'' term almost looks like what you want.
 
OK, i got it. Thank you all very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K