Equilibrium Solutions and General Form of Tsunami Model | Separable Diff EQ Work

ElijahRockers
Gold Member
Messages
260
Reaction score
10

Homework Statement



A model for the shape of a tsunami is given by

\frac{dW}{dx} = W\sqrt{4-2W}

where W(x) > 0 is the height of the wave expressed as a function of its position relative to a point off-shore.

Find the equilibrium solutions, and find the general form of the equation. Use graphing software to graph the direction field, and sketch all solutions that satisfy the initial condition W(0) = 2.

Homework Equations



\int \frac{dy}{y\sqrt{4-2y}} = -tanh(\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{4-2y})

The Attempt at a Solution



i'm pretty sure the equilibrium solutions are w = 0,2

but i have never seen or used hyperbolic trig functions, so I guess I was just wondering if they work the same way as regular trig functions.

It doesn't seem hard, I guess I would just like someone to verify my answer for the general form:

W(x) = 2-2arctanh^2(-x+C)

If anyone gets anything different let me know and I can show my work, thanks.

As for the sketching, as far as I can tell W(any x)=2 is a horizontal straight line, which seems pretty boring to sketch...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the equilibrium solutions are W= 0 and W= 2. And, yes, W= 2 is a pretty boring graph! As is W= 0. But what happens for other values of W? The problem suggests you use graphing software but a rough sketch of the direction fields is not difficult.

If W< 0, \sqrt{4- 2W}is positive so the product, W\sqrt{4- 2W} is negative. If 0&amp;lt; W&amp;lt; 2, W is positive, \sqrt{4- 2W} is still positive so W\sqrt{4- 2W} is positive. If W&amp;gt; 2, 4- 2W&amp;lt; 0 so \sqrt{4- 2W} is not a real number.
 
Interesting, I would've been confused if I didn't have the software, but your method makes a lot of sense. So then, W=2 is locally asymptotically stable, and W=0 would be unstable.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top