Undergrad Discontinuous systems? And why do we need uniqueness anyway?

  • Thread starter Thread starter askmathquestions
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Systems Uniqueness
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the limitations of ordinary differential equations, which typically rely on continuous derivatives, and the implications for uniqueness in solutions. It explores whether introducing functions with finite step discontinuities can still yield unique solutions, particularly in the context of Riemann-integrable functions and classes of L^1 functions. The conversation highlights the physical analogy of a car's trajectory, which can overlap yet remain continuous, suggesting that non-uniqueness in mathematical solutions may not be problematic if the "direction" or "inertia" of trajectories is tracked. Participants question how to impose constraints on differential equations to achieve practical, continuous trajectories in real-world scenarios. Ultimately, the focus is on understanding the conditions under which uniqueness can be maintained in systems that exhibit non-unique solutions.
askmathquestions
Messages
65
Reaction score
6
Much of the theory of ordinary differential equations is based around continuous derivatives. A lot of nice theories came together with semi-group theory of linear systems and the Banach contraction theorem, but these are limited to continuous functions. Then you get into partial differential equations and uniqueness is generally applied to PDE with analytic coefficients.

Can we introduce functions with a finite number of step discontinuities and still achieve uniqueness? Such functions are Riemann-integrable correct? So, does uniqueness hold for some classes of ##L^1## functions?

If not, can we identify the points where the trajectories are not unique, and decide "which" trajectory is chosen with some book-keeping of the inertia or "direction" of a trajectory?

If you think about this physically, a car or bike on a 2D surface might go in a loop-de-loop, it's trajectory will overlap with itself at multiple points. You'll notice this doesn't magically stop the car from attaining a smooth, continuous trajectory, even though mathematically, multiple trajectories may intersect with themselves or each other and and are therefore not unique.

Analogously, I don't believe uniqueness should truly be a problem for non-unique solutions to differential equations, so long as we can keep track of the "direction" or "inertia". But, how do we do that? What constraint or assumptions do we introduce to differential equations to attain continuous and practical trajectories that may model physical phenomena where trajectories are not necessarily unique?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
askmathquestions said:
Can we introduce functions with a finite number of step discontinuities and still achieve uniqueness? Such functions are Riemann-integrable correct? So, does uniqueness hold for some classes of ##L^1## functions?
What have you learned about this in your studies so far?

askmathquestions said:
If not, can we identify the points where the trajectories are not unique, and decide "which" trajectory is chosen with some book-keeping of the inertia or "direction" of a trajectory?
Are you asking "if we have a problem which has multiple solutions, can we introduce additional information that makes the solution unique"? What do you think the answer is?

askmathquestions said:
If you think about this physically, a car or bike on a 2D surface might go in a loop-de-loop, it's trajectory will overlap with itself at multiple points. You'll notice this doesn't magically stop the car from attaining a smooth, continuous trajectory, even though mathematically, multiple trajectories may intersect with themselves or each other and and are therefore not unique.
Yes, so ## \dfrac {dy}{dx} = f(x, y) ## is not a good model for a car's motion. Can you think of a better one?

askmathquestions said:
Analogously, I don't believe uniqueness should truly be a problem for non-unique solutions to differential equations, so long as we can keep track of the "direction" or "inertia". But, how do we do that? What constraint or assumptions do we introduce to differential equations to attain continuous and practical trajectories that may model physical phenomena where trajectories are not necessarily unique?
Given your answers to my questions above, do you think there is a unique way of determining these additional constraints?
 
askmathquestions said:
a car or bike on a 2D surface might go in a loop-de-loop, it's trajectory will overlap with itself at multiple points
Its trajectory in ordinary space, but ordinary space is not the correct space to be looking at if you want uniqueness. For a deterministic system, the trajectory in phase space is what must be unique (no overlapping with itself--although it is possible for an idealized system to have a phase space trajectory that is a closed curve).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
519
Replies
1
Views
13K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K