How Can You Solve This Complex Integral Equation Involving \(\phi(t)\)?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Limhes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a complex integral equation involving the function \(\phi(t)\). Participants explore methods to derive an expression for \(\phi(t)\) that satisfies the given equation, which is framed within the context of calculus and mathematical reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an integral equation and seeks a general approach to find \(\phi(t)\), expressing uncertainty about their calculus skills.
  • Another participant points out a potential issue with the original equation, noting that the integral does not depend on \(x\), while the left side does.
  • A later reply confirms the correction of the equation but does not elaborate further.
  • One participant proposes differentiating both sides of the equation with respect to \(x\) and concludes that if \(\phi(t)\) is not constant, no solution exists, raising questions about the validity of the original problem.
  • Another participant introduces the rule for parametric differentiation, suggesting a method to approach the problem but does not provide a definitive solution.
  • One participant mentions that the problem relates to the calculus of variations, indicating a specific area of mathematical analysis relevant to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the solvability of the integral equation, with some suggesting that no solution exists while others propose methods to explore the problem further. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of a function \(\phi(t)\) that satisfies the equation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the function \(\phi(t)\) and the conditions under which the integral equation is valid. The discussion reflects varying interpretations of the mathematical expressions involved.

Limhes
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Currently I am puzzling on a real-world problem, involving some maths which I cannot solve using my limited calculus knowledge. The problem ultimately boils down to finding an expression for the function [itex]\phi(t)[/itex] which satisfies the following equation for any x within limits [itex]0 < x < 1 - x_s[/itex]:

[itex]1 - x - x_{s} = \int_{x_s/\phi_{max}}^{1/\phi_{2} - 1/\phi_{1}\cdot x} \phi(t) dt[/itex]

Constants: [itex]x_{s}, \phi_{1}, \phi_{2}, \phi_{max}[/itex] with [itex]0 < x_s < 1[/itex] and [itex]0 < \phi_{1} < \phi_{2} < \phi_{max}[/itex].

Has anybody got a clue on how to do this? An general approach would be much appreciated! Just gessing functions and trying them out somehow doesn't feel very intelligent...

.edit: I'll put you as co-author ;)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There seems to be something missing from your expression. There is no x in the integral expression on the right, so it won't depend on x, while the left side does.
 
mathman said:
There seems to be something missing from your expression. There is no x in the integral expression on the right, so it won't depend on x, while the left side does.

Aah, I put it wrongly. Should be correct now!
 
Suppose that a function Phi exists as a solution of the integral equation.
Then differentiate (relatively to x) the left and rigth terms of the equation. You obtain :
-1 = (-1/phi1)*Phi(t) where t=(1/phi2)-(x/phi1)
The left term is constant while the rigth term depends on x. This is impossible exept if the function Phi(t) is constant.
As we suppose Phi(t) is not constant, there is no function Phi(t) solution of the problem.
 
Use the rule for parametric differentiation with varying limits:

[tex] \frac{d}{d x} \int_{\varphi_{1}(x)}^{\varphi_{2}(x)}{F(x, t) \, dt} = \int_{\varphi_{1}(x)}^{\varphi_{2}(x)}{\frac{\partial F(x, t)}{\partial x} \, dt} + F(x, \varphi_{2}(x)) \varphi'_{2}(x) - F(x, \varphi_{1}(x)) \varphi'_{1}(x)[/tex]

Hmmm, testing...
[tex] \frac{\partial F(x, t)}{\partial x}[/tex]
 
JJacquelin said:
Suppose that a function Phi exists as a solution of the integral equation.
Then differentiate (relatively to x) the left and rigth terms of the equation. You obtain :
-1 = (-1/phi1)*Phi(t) where t=(1/phi2)-(x/phi1)
The left term is constant while the rigth term depends on x. This is impossible exept if the function Phi(t) is constant.
As we suppose Phi(t) is not constant, there is no function Phi(t) solution of the problem.
Is it that easy? Shame on me.. I will look into this tonight (I'm in the Netherlands) and come back to it!

Dickfore said:
Use the rule for parametric differentiation with varying limits:

[tex] \frac{d}{d x} \int_{\varphi_{1}(x)}^{\varphi_{2}(x)}{F(x, t) \, dt} = \int_{\varphi_{1}(x)}^{\varphi_{2}(x)}{\frac{\partial F(x, t)}{\partial x} \, dt} + F(x, \varphi_{2}(x)) \varphi'_{2}(x) - F(x, \varphi_{1}(x)) \varphi'_{1}(x)[/tex]

Hmmm, testing...
[tex] \frac{\partial F(x, t)}{\partial x}[/tex]

Thank you! More to study in the evening..
 
What you are trying to do is handled by a branch of analysis known as the calculus of variations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K