How do we solve the ODE for the initial value problem with Burger's equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter docnet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ode Pde
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on solving the initial value problem for Burger's equation, specifically addressing the substitution and integration steps involved. The initial condition is given as u(0,x)=g, leading to the expression for φ(0,x) derived from the separable ODE. Participants point out a misquoted boundary condition and the omission of a constant of integration, clarifying that this will not impact the function u(0,x). The integration steps are confirmed to be correct, with no further questions raised. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the mathematical process of solving the ODE related to Burger's equation.
docnet
Messages
796
Reaction score
489
Homework Statement
please see below
Relevant Equations
please see below
Sorry the problem is a bit long to read. thank you to anyone who comments.

Screen Shot 2021-03-25 at 11.41.05 PM.png

We consider the initial value problem for the Burger's equation with viscosity given by
$$\begin{cases} \partial_t u-\partial^2_xu+u\partial_xu=0 & \text{in}\quad (1,T)\times R\\\quad \quad \quad \quad \quad u(0,\cdot)=g & \text{on}\quad \{t=0\}\times R \end{cases}$$
(1) We know that ##u(0,x)=g## so the substitution of the Burger equation gives $$u(0,x)=\boxed{g=\frac{-2}{\phi(0,x)}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\phi(0,x)}$$ which is a separable ODE for ##\psi:=\phi(0,x)##. \\\\To solve the ODE, we re-write the equation
$$\Rightarrow \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Big[ln(\phi(0,x))\Big]=-\frac{g}{2}$$
and integrate
$$\Rightarrow \int\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Big[ln(\phi(0,x))\Big]dx=-\int \frac{g}{2} dx$$
$$\Rightarrow ln(\phi(0,x))=-\int \frac{g}{2} dx$$
then exponentiate
$$\Rightarrow \phi(0,x)=\boxed{exp(-\int\frac{g}{2}dx)}$$
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2021-03-25 at 11.41.05 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2021-03-25 at 11.41.05 PM.png
    28.4 KB · Views: 189
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks ok. Are you just seeking confirmation?
You did misquote a boundary as (1,T) instead of (0,T).
 
Technically you are missing a constant of integration. This will not affect ##u(0,\cdot)## however as it will cancel between denominator and numerator in the definition of ##u## in terms of ##\phi##.

Was there a question here?
 
Orodruin said:
you are missing a constant of integration
It was left as an indefinite integral.
 
haruspex said:
Looks ok. Are you just seeking confirmation?
You did misquote a boundary as (1,T) instead of (0,T).
Orodruin said:
Technically you are missing a constant of integration. This will not affect ##u(0,\cdot)## however as it will cancel between denominator and numerator in the definition of ##u## in terms of ##\phi##.

Was there a question here?

Thanks! :bow: No questions, but I was unsure about the following step.

docnet said:
and integrate
$$\Rightarrow \int\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Big[ln(\phi(0,x))\Big]dx=-\int \frac{g}{2} dx$$
$$\Rightarrow ln(\phi(0,x))=-\int \frac{g}{2} dx$$
 
docnet said:
Thanks! :bow: No questions, but I was unsure about the following step.
Yes, that's fine.
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K