maverick280857
- 1,774
- 5
Hello
In our math course, we encountered the following elliptic PDE:
<br /> y^{2}u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0<br />
In order to solve it, we converted it to the characteristic equation,
<br /> y^{2}\left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^{2} + 1 = 0<br />
Next, we wrote:
\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{i}{y}
My question is: the characteristic equation has no solution in \mathbb{R} but we went ahead and mechanically wrote the expression for dy/dx. Does this mean that we should regard x and y as complex variables? If so, how does one reconcile with the fact that some solution to the PDE as u(x,y) = c is a surface in (x,y,u) space? Perhaps this is a trivial question, but I'm just starting to learn PDEs. Does this also mean that we should not ascribe a physical significance to x and y as coordinates in \mathbb{R}^2?
Thanks.
In our math course, we encountered the following elliptic PDE:
<br /> y^{2}u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0<br />
In order to solve it, we converted it to the characteristic equation,
<br /> y^{2}\left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^{2} + 1 = 0<br />
Next, we wrote:
\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{i}{y}
My question is: the characteristic equation has no solution in \mathbb{R} but we went ahead and mechanically wrote the expression for dy/dx. Does this mean that we should regard x and y as complex variables? If so, how does one reconcile with the fact that some solution to the PDE as u(x,y) = c is a surface in (x,y,u) space? Perhaps this is a trivial question, but I'm just starting to learn PDEs. Does this also mean that we should not ascribe a physical significance to x and y as coordinates in \mathbb{R}^2?
Thanks.