Fredholm equation of the second kind

  • Thread starter Thread starter danbone87
  • Start date Start date
danbone87
Messages
28
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I need to prove that a Fredholm equation of the second kind is functionally linear.

I'm not sure what functional linearity is or if that's exactly what is being asked because it's not in my numerical analysis book and everytime i look on the internet I'm referred to linear algebra.

Can someone get me on the right track as far as what I'm actually looking to prove?edit: I also need to solve a fredholm eqn of the second kind analytically. Hint: my result should contain a low order polynomial.

it is y(x) = x + integral[0,1](x^2*t)y(t)dt

every example i see is numerical integration. so i couldn't find any examples to work off of.
should i do integration by parts on the integrand and then set up a differential equation involving Y(t) and y(x) and then solve with a characteristic polynomial?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Saying that an operator, U(f), is "functionally linear" means that U(af+ bg)= aU(f)+ bU(g) where f and g are functions and a and b are numbers.

The equation you are asked to solve is y(x)= x+ \int_0^1 x^2ty(t)dt= x+ x^2\int_0^1 ty(t)dt.

If you let A= \int_0^1 ty(t)dt, a number, then your equation is simply y(x)= x+ Ax2. that's the "low order polynomial" you mention. You only need to determine what A is. Multiply on both sides by x to get xy(x)= x2+ Ax3 and integrate from 0 to 1. The left side is just X so you get a linear equation to solve for x.
 
thanks so much that helps everything.
 
uh, apparently i need the proof in the form of c1y1+c2y2 = f and Lf=y. in this case do i need to use method of undetermined coeffecients with the y(x)=x+ax^2 ?
 
bump. Any help is greatly appreciated!
 
The Rock says...


...
...
...
 
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