MHB Green's theorem - Boundary value problem has at most one solution

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that the boundary value problem defined by a partial differential equation has at most one solution using Green's theorem. The participants explore the implications of assuming two solutions exist, leading to the definition of a new function, w, which satisfies a related equation. They apply Green's theorem to relate the interior integral to boundary conditions, noting that w equals zero on the boundary defined by x² + y² = 1. The conversation also touches on the use of polar coordinates and clarifies the distinction between Green's theorem and integration by parts in higher dimensions. Ultimately, the participants aim to demonstrate that any maximum or minimum of w in the interior leads to a contradiction, reinforcing the uniqueness of the solution.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

Prove using Green's theorem that the boundary value problem $$\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}\left ( (1+x^2)\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{x}}\right )+\frac{\partial}{\partial{y}}\left ( (1+x^2+y^2)\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{y}}\right ) -(1+x^2+y^4)u=f(x,y), x^2+y^2<1 \\ u(x, y)=g(x,y), x^2+y^2=1$$ has at most one solution.

I have done the following:

We suppose that the problem has two different solutions $u_1, u_2$. Then $w=u_1-u_2$ solves the problem:

$$\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}\left ( (1+x^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{x}}\right )+\frac{\partial}{\partial{y}}\left ( (1+x^2+y^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{y}}\right ) -(1+x^2+y^4)w=0, x^2+y^2<1 \\ w(x, y)=0, x^2+y^2=1$$

From Green's theorem at $\Omega$ we have that $$\iint_{\Omega}\left (\frac{\partial{Q}}{\partial{x}}-\frac{\partial{P}}{\partial{y}}\right )dxdy=\int_{\partial{\Omega}}(Pdx+Qdy)$$

We choose $$Q=(1+x^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{x}}, P=-(1+x^2+y^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{y}}$$

$$\iint_{\Omega}\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}\left ( (1+x^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{x}}\right )+\frac{\partial}{\partial{y}}\left ((1+x^2+y^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{y}}\right )\\ =-\int_{\partial{\Omega}}-(1+x^2+y^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{y}}dx+(1+x^2)\frac{\partial{w}}{\partial{x}}dy$$

How could I continue?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi! (Smile)

Logically the next step should be to fill in the boundary, which has $x^2+y^2=1$, and which we can trace with $x=\cos\phi,y=\sin\phi$.
Furthermore, we know that on this boundary, we have $w(x,y)=w(\phi)=0$.
Thus:
$$\d w \phi = \pd w x \d x \phi + \pd w y \d y \phi = 0 \Rightarrow -w_x y + w_y x = 0$$
Although, to be honest, I still don't see how we're supposed to find from this that $w(x,y)=0$ on the interior. (Sweating)

Btw, I think there is a superfluous minus sign. (Worried)
I do see another approach... (Thinking)
If we work out the derivatives, and if we assume $w$ has a maximum $w>0$ in the interior, then it follows that at this maximum $w_x=w_y=0$ and $w_{xx}, w_{yy} \le 0$. This leads to a contradiction. Same thing for a minimum. (Mmm)
 
I like Serena said:
Logically the next step should be to fill in the boundary, which has $x^2+y^2=1$, and which we can trace with $x=\cos\phi,y=\sin\phi$.
Furthermore, we know that on this boundary, we have $w(x,y)=w(\phi)=0$.
Thus:
$$\d w \phi = \pd w x \d x \phi + \pd w y \d y \phi = 0 \Rightarrow -w_x y + w_y x = 0$$
Although, to be honest, I still don't see how we're supposed to find from this that $w(x,y)=0$ on the interior. (Sweating)

So, to use the Green's theorem do we have to use spherical coordinates?? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
So, to use the Green's theorem do we have to use spherical coordinates?? (Wondering)

Polar coordinates actually, yes. (Thinking)
 
I found the following solution in my notes:

View attachment 4460

Could you explain to me the part where $V_x$ is used?? (Wondering)
 

Attachments

  • Green.PNG
    Green.PNG
    31.8 KB · Views: 129
mathmari said:
I found the following solution in my notes:



Could you explain to me the part where $V_x$ is used?? (Wondering)

Interesting! (Happy)

That's not Green's Theorem but Integration by parts in higher dimensions.
$V_x$ is supposed to be the x-component of the outward facing normal on the boundary, which I think should be $x$ instead of $1$. :eek:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K