How Can I Find the Inverse Laplace Transform of These Functions?

drdolittle
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Can somebody help me to find the inverse laplace transform of these functions

exp(sqrt(1+s))
sqrt(1+s))

I tried solving these using MATLAB and mathematica,it is unable to give a result.
Do they contain any closed form solution or should i have to go for a numerical technique to solve them?If so,anybody aware of accurate and efficient numerical technique?
Currently iam using a Numerical technique using Haar wavelet matrices but doubt on its validity in terms of both accuracy and efficiency.
sombeody please help me.Thanx in advance

regards
drdolittle

:cry:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Try replacing sqrt(1+s) by it Taylor series, 1+x/2 -(x^2)/8 +(x^3)/16 +...
then express the inverse Laplace transform as an infinite sum.

Ray
 
That's a tough one! Would an asymptotic expansion be of any use?
 
thanx for the suggestion.
but if we use a taylor series we have to truncate at some point of time and i presume it will not be more efficient than numerical techniques...i hope so

Regards
drdolittle
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top