Help With a Mess of a Separable Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter cowmoo32
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Separable
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on solving an initial value problem represented by the Michaelis-Menten equation for a chemical reactant S(t). An implicit solution is sought, with the initial condition S(0) = S0. The original attempt at integration was flawed, missing a minus sign, and the correct approach involves integrating the equation properly to relate S and t. The Lambert W-function is noted as necessary for expressing S(t) in terms of elementary functions. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying integration techniques and incorporating initial conditions to derive the implicit solution accurately.
cowmoo32
Messages
121
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let S(t) represent the amount of a chemical reactant present at time t, where t>= 0. Assume that S(t) can be determined by solving the initial value problem
http://webwork.math.ncsu.edu/webwork2_files/tmp/equations/21/885ac2eff6f65b363662233870e25e1.png

where a, K, and S0 are positive constants. Obtain an implicit solution of the initial value problem. (The differential equation, often referred to as the Michaelis-Menten equation, arises in the study of biochemical reactions.)


The Attempt at a Solution


\frac{dS}{dt} = \frac{aS}{K + S}

\int\frac{K + S}{aS} = \intdt

ln(aS)(\frac{S^2}{2}+KS) = t

I'm not even sure how to begin to solve for S
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
cowmoo32 said:
...where a, K, and S0 are positive constants. Obtain an implicit solution of the initial value problem. (The differential equation, often referred to as the Michaelis-Menten equation, arises in the study of biochemical reactions.)...

Technically, if all you need is an implicit solution, then you're almost done - you never need to solve for S(t)... With an implicit solution, all you need is an equation which relates S and t. S and t are related by the expression you came to at the end: ln(aS)(S22+KS) = t. Moreover, that ODE doesn't have a solution S(t) in terms of elementary functions. You need the Lambert W-function to express it.

However, I would caution you that your integral seems to be missing a minus sign. Moreover, when I come up with the implicit solution, I get a completely different answer...

<br /> \int -\frac{K+S}{aS}dS=\int dt\\<br /> \Rightarrow \int -\frac{K}{aS}-\frac{S}{aS}dS=t+c\\<br /> \Rightarrow \int -\frac{K}{aS}-\frac{1}{a}dS=t+c\\<br /> \Rightarrow -\frac{1}{a}(K\ln (S(t))+S(t))=t+C<br />

(I'm not sure where you went wrong, but this is what you should be doing.)
Now, can you see what you need to do? Your constant of integration C is still there, but you have an initial condition S(0)=S_0...
 
Last edited:
cowmoo32 said:
\int\frac{K + S}{aS} = \intdt

ln(aS)(\frac{S^2}{2}+KS) = t

That antiderivative isn't correct. You can't do
$$\int \frac{K+S}{aS}dS = \int\frac 1 {aS}dS\int K+S\, dS$$












4
 
christoff said:
Technically, if all you need is an implicit solution, then you're almost done - you never need to solve for S(t)... With an implicit solution, all you need is an equation which relates S and t. S and t are related by the expression you came to at the end: ln(aS)(S22+KS) = t. Moreover, that ODE doesn't have a solution S(t) in terms of elementary functions. You need the Lambert W-function to express it.

However, I would caution you that your integral seems to be missing a minus sign. Moreover, when I come up with the implicit solution, I get a completely different answer...

<br /> \int -\frac{K+S}{aS}dS=\int dt\\<br /> \Rightarrow \int -\frac{K}{aS}-\frac{S}{aS}dS=t+c\\<br /> \Rightarrow \int -\frac{K}{aS}-\frac{1}{a}dS=t+c\\<br /> \Rightarrow -\frac{1}{a}(K\ln (S(t))+S(t))=t+C<br />

(I'm not sure where you went wrong, but this is what you should be doing.)
Now, can you see what you need to do? Your constant of integration C is still there, but you have an initial condition S(0)=S_0...
I'll give it another go and see what I come up with.

LCKurtz said:
That antiderivative isn't correct. You can't do
$$\int \frac{K+S}{aS}dS = \int\frac 1 {aS}dS\int K+S\, dS$$
You're right. I meant to split them into two fractions, not separate the numerator from the denominator.
 
ok, so I get <br /> -\frac{K}{a}(\ln (S(t))+S(t)=t+C<br />

Substituting S(0)=S0. I can't get the tex code correct, but I'm replacing S(t) with S0. When I solve for C, I get the entire equation =0, which isn't correct.
 
cowmoo32 said:
ok, so I get


<br /> -\frac{K}{a}(\ln (S(t))+S(t)=t+C<br />

Substituting S(0)=S0. I can't get the tex code correct, but I'm replacing S(t) with S0. When I solve for C, I get the entire equation =0, which isn't correct.

That should be$$-\frac{1}{a}(K\ln S(t)+S(t))=t+C$$
When you put ##t=0## and ##S(0) = S_0## in that equation you get$$
-\frac{1}{a}(K\ln (S_0)+S_0)=C$$Put that in for ##C## in the top equation.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K