How does one solve Uxx+Uyy+Uzz=C when C is non-zero?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sukmeov
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differential equation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the partial differential equation Uxx + Uyy + Uzz = C, where C is a non-zero constant, within a spherical domain. Participants explore various methods and approaches for addressing this equation, which is identified as Poisson's equation, and discuss boundary conditions and coordinate transformations relevant to the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest starting with the homogeneous equation Uxx + Uyy + Uzz = 0 before adding a particular solution to address the non-homogeneous part.
  • Others mention that the equation can be interpreted in the context of electric potential for a uniformly charged sphere, referencing the relationship to Poisson's equation.
  • There is a discussion on whether C is a constant or a function of x, y, z, with implications for the solution methods.
  • One participant proposes using spherical coordinates and Sturm-Liouville theory to handle the boundary conditions effectively.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of recognizing the symmetry in the problem and suggests using Green's functions or Gauss' law to derive the solution.
  • Some participants note that the boundary conditions and the nature of the source term simplify the problem, allowing for a reduction to a one-dimensional ordinary differential equation in spherical coordinates.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the equation is a form of Poisson's equation and that spherical coordinates are appropriate for the boundary conditions. However, there are multiple competing views on the best methods to solve the equation, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the most effective approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that the boundary conditions and the nature of the source term significantly influence the choice of solution methods. There is also mention of the uniqueness theorem, which suggests that if a solution is found, it must be the correct one, but the specific steps to reach that solution are debated.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals interested in solving partial differential equations, particularly in the context of physics and engineering applications involving electrostatics and boundary value problems.

sukmeov
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
How does one solve the partial differential equation Uxx+Uyy+Uzz=C when C is non-zero. Here U is a function of x,y and z where (x,y,z) lies in the ball centered at 0 of radius 1 and U=0 on the boundary. Uxx, Uyy and Uzz denote second partial derivatives with respect to x, y and z.
Any hints on how to approach this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Funny user name 🤔 .

Google Poisson equation. Your equation describes the electric potential of a non conducting uniformly charged sphere.

Are you aware of the equation for electric potential ##\Delta\phi = C## ?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Astronuc, PhDeezNutz, Delta2 and 3 others
My surname's funny? Many thanks.
 
sukmeov said:
Also it's not a nickname it's my surname.
Ah ... Sorry Ukan !
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sukmeov
This is a linear non-homogeneous equation so that you can first find the general solution to the associated homogeneous equation, U_{xx}+ U_{yy}+ U_{zz}= 0, then add anyone solution, such as U= \frac{C}{2}x^2, to the entire equation to get the general solution to the entire equat0ion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and roam
When you say C is non-zero, do you mean that C is a non-zero constant or that C is also a function of x,y,z? In either case, the answer, as @BvU said, is that this is Poisson's equation. There are several methods known for solving this, depending on what you know about C.
 
sinse ##C## is a constant it is just an ODE in the spherical coordinates
 
given that you have a perfect boundary condition: U=0 at r=1. The Sturm-Lioiville eigenproblem is designed to deal with such proper boundary condition. The boundary condition combined with the spherical coordinate gives orthorgonal basis set, each function of the basis set is product of spherical function and the Bessel function. The solution can be expanded using this basis set, and coefficients of the expansion can be fixed using C.
 
As stated in post #7 since you have a spherical boundary conditions you want to solve this in spherical coordinates. I think the best way to go about this is to use greens functions...and I just realized this thread is several months old.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Delta2, Chestermiller and etotheipi
  • #10
Another way to solve Poisson's Equation if there is symmetry in the source term (like in this example).

First solve for electric field ##\mathbf{E}=\nabla U## and ##\nabla\cdot\mathbf{E}=C## by using Gauss' law in integral form and taking advantage of the symmetry.

Then solve for U by using $$U=\int_{\mathcal{C}} \mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{l}$$ where ##\mathcal{C}## is a suitable path of integration, depending of what the form of E is. In this example I expect E to be in the radial direction, hence a suitable path of integration is along the radial line from position r to infinity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz
  • #11
Solving <br /> \frac1{r^2} \frac{d}{dr}\left(r^2\frac{du}{dr}\right) = C subject to u(1) = 0 doesn't really require resort to Green's funcions or Sturm-Liouville theory.

Most of the work here is in reducing the problem to that: knowing to use spherical polars and understanding that if the boundary condition does not depend on (\theta,\phi) then the solution probably doesn't, that the boundary condition at the origin is that u is finite, and that the uniqueness theorem guarantees that if we find a solution then it must be the solution.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz
  • #12
pasmith said:
understanding that if the boundary condition does not depend on (θ,ϕ) then the solution probably doesn't
Not only the boundary condition but the source term also doesn't depend on ##\theta,\phi## and hence the Laplacian operator ##\nabla^2## reduces to ##\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{d}{dr}\left (r^2\frac{d}{dr}\right )##, something that wasn't obvious from the start , because the problem was expressed with the Laplacian operator in cartesian coordinates.
 
  • #13
Did we all notice OP wasn't seen since June 28 (this year) ? :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz and Delta2

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
19K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K