How is Mathematica solving this ODE with periodic coefficients?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robin04
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ode
Click For Summary
Mathematica's solution to the ordinary differential equation (ODE) with periodic coefficients likely involves Floquet theory, specifically relating to Mathieu functions. The discussion highlights challenges in deriving a recursion relation due to the complexity of terms like y(x) * cos(ωx), which complicates power series expansion. Attempts to calculate coefficients individually proved unproductive, as the power series did not converge or align with numerical solutions. The equation is identified as a non-homogeneous version of Mathieu's equation, suggesting that Mathematica's output may result from applying variation of parameters to the homogeneous solutions. Overall, the complexity of the ODE and its periodic nature necessitate advanced methods for resolution.
Robin04
Messages
259
Reaction score
16
Homework Statement
##y''(x)=a\cdot \cos{(\omega x)}(b+c\cdot y(x))##
Relevant Equations
-
245639

Mathematica gives this solution but how does it calculate it? What's the method here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If there is a particular method or if this is a specific type of ode that lends itself to a straight forward solution, then I don't off hand, know what it is. Sooo, what I would generally do after rearranging it and trying to change variables into something I recognize is to just find a series solution and see if the recursion relation or the resulting terms can be collected into some standard functions. Personally, I think I'd go for leaving it as a series given the output from mathematica, which doesn't seem very illuminating.
 
  • Like
Likes Robin04
The solution WolframAlpha gives is a giant mess! (Similar to what you have.)
I would search for the Mathieu functions, i.e. try to figure it out from behind.
 
  • Like
Likes Robin04
bobob said:
If there is a particular method or if this is a specific type of ode that lends itself to a straight forward solution, then I don't off hand, know what it is. Sooo, what I would generally do after rearranging it and trying to change variables into something I recognize is to just find a series solution and see if the recursion relation or the resulting terms can be collected into some standard functions. Personally, I think I'd go for leaving it as a series given the output from mathematica, which doesn't seem very illuminating.
Képkivágás.PNG

I wasn't able to derive a recursion relation due to the term ##y(x) \cdot \cos{(\omega x)}## as in power series form I get an infinite sum times an infinite sum, not sure how to deal with that. Calculating the coefficients one by one didn't look like a useful thing to do, as Mathematica can do it too. Moreover, the power series doesn't seem to converge even in higher orders (I tried it for 30), and it does not match the numerical solution:
Képkivágás.PNG

Does this mean that this cannot be solved with power series or I missed something?
 
I am not an expert on this, but ODEs with periodic coefficients are handled with Floquet theory. Your particular equation is essentially Mathieu’s equation
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathieu_functionThe homogeneous equation has two solutions (of course), which are called Matthieu functions.

You have a non-homogeneous version ( your sinusoid forcing function). So Mathematica’s solution looks like what you would get if you applied variation of parameters using the two solutions to the homogeneous equation.

Jason
 
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
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
911
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K