(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

I'm teaching myself the Green's function method for ODEs, because it looks relevant to my interests. This is a (slightly contrived) problem I just came up with arbitrarily:

[tex]y''+5y'+6y=sin(x) \; \; \; ; \; \; \; y(0)=y'(0)=0[/tex]

2. Relevant equations

i) When considered as a function of [itex]x[/itex] alone, [itex]G(x, z)[/itex] must obey the homogeneous initial conditions.

ii) The derivatives of [itex]G(x, z)[/itex] with respect to [itex]x[/itex] up to order [itex]n - 2[/itex] are continuous at [itex]x = z[/itex], but the [itex](n - 1)^{th}[/itex] order derivative has a discontinuity of [itex]\large{\frac{1}{a_{n}(z)}}[/itex] at this point.

3. The attempt at a solution

Proceeding with the complementary solution (following the procedure outlined in my text):

[tex]G(x, z)=\left\{\begin{matrix}

A(z)e^{-2x} + B(z)e^{-3x}\Rightarrow & x<z \\

C(z)e^{-2x} + D(z)e^{-3x}\Rightarrow & x>z

\end{matrix}\right.[/tex]

We require [itex]G(0, z) = G'(0, z) = 0[/itex]. For some reason this implies [itex]A(z) = B(z) = 0[/itex]. I mean, it's obvious that this is true if [itex]G(x, z) = A(z)e^{-2x} + B(z)e^{-3z}[/itex], but it's a piecewise function, so why do we only consider [itex]x < z [/itex]?

Anyways, this equation is of order 2, so we need the 0^{th}order derivative to be continuous. Also, the 1^{st}derivative needs to have a discontinuity of 1 (because the leading coefficient is 1):

[tex]\begin{matrix}

C(z)e^{-2z}+D(z)e^{-3z}=0\\ -2C(z)e^{-2z}-3D(z)e^{-3z}=1

\end{matrix}[/tex]

Solving gives [itex]C(z) = e^{2z}, D(z) = -e^{3z}[/itex]. Then:

[tex]y(x) = \int_{0}^{\infty }G(x,z)sin(z)dz [/tex]

[tex]y(x)=\int_{0}^{x }[e^{2z-2x}-e^{3z-3x}]sin(z)dz[/tex]

[tex]y(x)=\frac{1}{10}(e^{-3x} (2e^{x}-1) - cos(x) + sin(x)) \leftarrow \text{Lazily computed with Mathematica.}[/tex]

What I don't get is why that improper integral all of a sudden changed to have limits from 0 to [itex]x[/itex]. Furthermore, why is it even an improper integral at all? I suspect that it's because the initial conditions don't specify a boundary, but then why shouldn't the lower limit be negative infinity?

Thanks so much, and sorry about the wall of Tex

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Green's Functions (for ODE)

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**