Finding Eigenvalues for the Heat Equation: A Step-by-Step Approach

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding eigenvalues for the heat equation, specifically the problem defined by the partial differential equation $$u_t(x, t)-u_{xx}(x, t)=0$$ with boundary conditions. Participants explore the separation of variables method, the resulting eigenvalue problems, and the implications of the solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a solution of the form $$u(x, t)=X(x) \cdot T(t)$$ and derives two separate problems for $X(x)$ and $T(t)$.
  • Another participant confirms the correctness of the approach and discusses the countability of the eigenvalues, referencing the periodic nature of the tangent function.
  • There is a question about the validity of dividing by $X(1)$, with some participants expressing uncertainty about whether $X(1)$ can be assumed non-zero.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the boundary condition $$u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0$$ and how to handle it without dividing by $X(1)$.
  • One participant suggests substituting $$T'(t)=-\lambda T(t)$$ to avoid division by $T(t)$, assuming non-trivial solutions.
  • There is a repeated inquiry about the countability of the eigenvalues and the reasoning behind it, with references to graphical representations of the functions involved.
  • Participants explore whether similar arguments about countability apply to different forms of the eigenvalue equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach to solving the heat equation and the countability of the eigenvalues, but there is ongoing uncertainty regarding the assumptions about $X(1)$ and how to handle it in calculations. The discussion remains unresolved on some technical points related to these assumptions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the non-zero values of $X(1)$ and $T(t)$, which could affect the validity of certain steps in the derivation. The discussion also highlights the dependence on the definitions of the functions involved and the conditions under which the eigenvalues are derived.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and researchers interested in partial differential equations, eigenvalue problems, and the mathematical methods used in physics and engineering contexts.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

Find the solution of the problem $$u_t(x, t)-u_{xx}(x, t)=0, 0<x<1, t>0 \tag {*} \\ u(0, t)=0, t>0 \\ u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0, t>0$$

I have done the following:

We are looking for solutions of the form $$u(x, t)=X(x) \cdot T(t)$$

$$u(0, t)=X(0) \cdot T(t)=0 \Rightarrow X(0)=0 \\ X'(1) \cdot T(t)+X(1) \cdot T'(t)=0 \Rightarrow \frac{X'(1)}{X(1)}=-\frac{T'(t)}{T(t)}$$

$$(*) \Rightarrow X(x) \cdot T'(t)-X''(x) \cdot T(t)=0 \\ \Rightarrow \frac{X(x) \cdot T'(t)}{X(x) \cdot T(t)}-\frac{X''(x) \cdot T(t)}{X(x) \cdot T(t)}=0 \\ \Rightarrow \frac{T'(t)}{T(t)}=\frac{X''(x)}{X(x)}=-\lambda$$

So, we get the following two problems:
$$\left.\begin{matrix}
X''(x)+\lambda X(x)=0, 0<x<1\\
X(0)=0 \\
\frac{X'(1)}{X(1)}=\lambda \Rightarrow X'(1)-\lambda X(1)=0
\end{matrix}\right\}(1)
$$

$$\left.\begin{matrix}
T'(t)+\lambda T(t)=0, t>0
\end{matrix}\right\}(2)$$

For the problem $(1)$ we do the following:

The characteristic polynomial is $d^2+\lambda=0$.
  • $\lambda <0$ :

    $X(x)=c_1 \sinh (\sqrt{-\lambda} x)+c_2 \cosh (\sqrt{-\lambda}x)$

    Using the initial values we get that $X(x)=0$, trivial solution.
  • $\lambda=0$ :

    $X(x)=c_1 x+c_2$

    Using the initial values we get that $X(x)=0$, trivial solution.
  • $\lambda >0$ :

    $X(x)=c_1 cos (\sqrt{\lambda}x)+c_2 \sin (\sqrt{\lambda}x)$

    $X(0)=0 \Rightarrow c_1=0 \Rightarrow X(x)=c_2=\sin (\sqrt{\lambda}x)$

    $X'(1)-\lambda X(1)=0 \Rightarrow \tan (\sqrt{\lambda})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}$

That means that the eigenvalue problem $(1)$ has only positive eigenvalues $0<\lambda_1 < \lambda_2 < \dots < \lambda_k < \dots $ that are the positive roots of the equation $\tan \sqrt{x}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{x}}$.

Is this correct??

Why can we say that the number of the eigenvalues is countable ?? (Wondering)

How can we show that $$\lim_{k \rightarrow +\infty} \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_k}}{k \pi}=1$$ ?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi! (Wave)

mathmari said:
Is this correct??

Yep. (Smile)

Why can we say that the number of the eigenvalues is countable ?? (Wondering)

Take a look at this plot of $\tan y$ and $\frac 1 y$.

The tangent has a period of $\pi$ and in each period it has exactly 1 intersection with $\frac 1 y$.
Since there are a countable number of periods of the tangent, that means that the number of solutions is also countable. (Thinking)
How can we show that $$\lim_{k \rightarrow +\infty} \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_k}}{k \pi}=1$$ ?? (Wondering)

In the same graph, you can see that each successive intersection of $\tan y$ and $\frac 1 y$ is closer and closer to where $\tan y$ intersects the axis. That is at $k\pi$.
So those intersections, that correspond to $\sqrt {\lambda_k}$, approach $k\pi$.
Thus:
$$\lim_{k\to \infty} \frac{\sqrt {\lambda_k}}{k\pi} = 1$$
(Wasntme)
 
I understand! (Sun)
I like Serena said:
Take a look at this plot of $\tan y$ and $\frac 1 y$.

The tangent has a period of $\pi$ and in each period it has exactly 1 intersection with $\frac 1 y$.
Since there are a countable number of periods of the tangent, that means that the number of solutions is also countable.

When we have an other problem, and we find that the eigenvalues are the positive roots of the equation $\tan (\sqrt{\lambda } \pi)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}$, is the argument the same?? (Wondering)
I have also an other question...

mathmari said:
$$u(0, t)=X(0) \cdot T(t)=0 \Rightarrow X(0)=0 \\ X'(1) \cdot T(t)+X(1) \cdot T'(t)=0 \Rightarrow \frac{X'(1)}{X(1)}=-\frac{T'(t)}{T(t)}$$

To divide with $X(1)$ are we sure that it isn't zero?? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
I understand! (Sun)

Good! (Happy)


When we have an other problem, and we find that the eigenvalues are the positive roots of the equation $\tan (\sqrt{\lambda } \pi)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}$, is the argument the same?? (Wondering)

Yes. (Nod)
In this case the limit would be $$\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_k}}{k} = 1$$
I have also an other question...

To divide with $X(1)$ are we sure that it isn't zero?? (Wondering)

No, we can't be sure. (Shake)
 
I like Serena said:
No, we can't be sure. (Shake)

So, can't we do that or do we have to suppose that $X(1) \neq 0$ ?? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
So, can't we do that or do we have to suppose that $X(1) \neq 0$ ?? (Wondering)

Easiest is to avoid dividing by $X(1)$. (Wasntme)
Otherwise we should distinguish two cases. One where $X(1) \neq 0$ and one where $X(1) = 0$. (Nerd)
 
I like Serena said:
Easiest is to avoid dividing by $X(1)$. (Wasntme)
Otherwise we should distinguish two cases. One where $X(1) \neq 0$ and one where $X(1) = 0$. (Nerd)

How could we avoid dividing by $X(1)$ ?? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
How could we avoid dividing by $X(1)$ ?? (Wondering)

When do you need to? (Thinking)
 
I like Serena said:
When do you need to? (Thinking)

We have the problem $$u_t(x, t)-u_{xx}(x, t)=0, 0<x<1, t>0 \tag {*} \\ u(0, t)=0, t>0 \\ u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0, t>0$$

We are looking for solutions of the form $$u(x, t)=X(x) \cdot T(t)$$

$$u(0, t)=X(0) \cdot T(t)=0 \Rightarrow X(0)=0 \\ u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0 \Rightarrow X'(1) \cdot T(t)+X(1) \cdot T'(t)=0 \Rightarrow \frac{X'(1)}{X(1)}=-\frac{T'(t)}{T(t)}$$

$$(*) \Rightarrow X(x) \cdot T'(t)-X''(x) \cdot T(t)=0 \\ \Rightarrow \frac{X(x) \cdot T'(t)}{X(x) \cdot T(t)}-\frac{X''(x) \cdot T(t)}{X(x) \cdot T(t)}=0 \\ \Rightarrow \frac{T'(t)}{T(t)}=\frac{X''(x)}{X(x)}=-\lambda$$

So, we get the following two problems:
$$\left.\begin{matrix}
X''(x)+\lambda X(x)=0, 0<x<1\\
X(0)=0 \\
\frac{X'(1)}{X(1)}=\lambda \Rightarrow X'(1)-\lambda X(1)=0
\end{matrix}\right\}(1)
$$

$$\left.\begin{matrix}
T'(t)+\lambda T(t)=0, t>0
\end{matrix}\right\}(2)$$ If we don't divide by $X(1)$ how else could we use the condition $u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0 \Rightarrow X'(1) \cdot T(t)+X(1) \cdot T'(t)=0$ ?? (Wondering)
 
  • #10
mathmari said:
If we don't divide by $X(1)$ how else could we use the condition $u_x(1,t)+u_t(1,t)=0 \Rightarrow X'(1) \cdot T(t)+X(1) \cdot T'(t)=0$ ?? (Wondering)

Substitute $T'(t)=-\lambda T(t)$? (Thinking)

Afterwards, we can divide by $T(t)$.
If we assume that the solution for $u$ is non-trivial, $T(t)$ must be non-zero for at least one value of $t$. (Wasntme)
 
  • #11
I like Serena said:
Substitute $T'(t)=-\lambda T(t)$? (Thinking)

Afterwards, we can divide by $T(t)$.
If we assume that the solution for $u$ is non-trivial, $T(t)$ must be non-zero for at least one value of $t$. (Wasntme)

Ok... I see... (Emo)
I like Serena said:
Take a look at this plot of $\tan y$ and $\frac 1 y$.

The tangent has a period of $\pi$ and in each period it has exactly 1 intersection with $\frac 1 y$.
Since there are a countable number of periods of the tangent, that means that the number of solutions is also countable. (Thinking)

mathmari said:
When we have an other problem, and we find that the eigenvalues are the positive roots of the equation $\tan (\sqrt{\lambda } \pi)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}$, is the argument the same?? (Wondering)

The graph of $\tan (y \cdot \pi)$ and $\frac{1}{y}$ is the following: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=plot%5Btan%28y*%28pi%29%29%2C1%2Fy%2C+%7By%2C0%2C20%7D%5D

So do we say the following ?? (Wondering)

The $\tan (y \cdot \pi )$ has a period of $\pi$ and in each period it has exactly 1 intersection with $\frac 1 y$.
Since there are a countable number of periods of the tangent, that means that the number of solutions is also countable. How do we know that there are a countable number of periods of the tangent ?? (Wondering)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
mathmari said:
So do we say the following ?? (Wondering)

The $\tan (y \cdot \pi )$ has a period of $\pi$ and in each period it has exactly 1 intersection with $\frac 1 y$.
Since there are a countable number of periods of the tangent, that means that the number of solutions is also countable.

Sounds fine to me. (Smile)

How do we know that there are a countable number of periods of the tangent ?? (Wondering)

Each period on the positive axis is identified by $k\pi$ where $k \in \mathbb N$.
In other words, we have a bijective mapping from each period to $\mathbb N$.
That means we have a countably infinite number of periods. (Wasntme)
 
  • #13
I understand! Thank you very much! (flower)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K