How to Derive Euler Differential Equation for n=0?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derive Euler
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the solution to the Euler differential equation when n=0, specifically addressing the form of the solution and the reasoning behind it. Participants explore the implications of the equation and the nature of solutions in this specific case.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the Euler equation for n=0 and attempts to derive the solution using the form y=x^m, leading to a contradiction when m=0.
  • Another participant suggests that when encountering a solution of the form x^0 that does not work, it is advisable to check if ln(x) is a valid solution, noting its differentiation properties.
  • A later reply mentions that the second solution can be obtained by reduction of order, indicating a method to find additional solutions.
  • Another participant explains that the Euler type equation can be transformed into one with constant coefficients by substituting t=ln(x), which leads to a different form of the solution involving exponential functions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation process, and multiple viewpoints regarding the nature of solutions and methods to approach the problem are presented.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the nature of solutions and the methods for deriving them, particularly in the context of the Euler equation when n=0.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
[itex]x^2 y'' + x y' + n^2 y = 0 \;[/itex] Is Euler equation and solution is [itex]y=x^m[/itex]

I understand the three cases with different solution. But my question is if n=0.

If I use [itex]y=x^m \;\Rightarrow\; m(m-1)+m=0 \;\Rightarrow m^2 = 0 \;\Rightarrow m=0[/itex]

That would not work. I know the answer is [itex]y=C_1 ln(x) + C_2[/itex]

Can anyone show me or give me hint how to derive this, I can't find it in my book.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got it, I tried to delete this post and can't. Moderator, please delete the entire thread for me.

Thanks
 
Just as a general rule of thumb, any time you get a solution of x0 that isn't really a solution, you should check to see if ln(x) is a solution. ln(x) differentiates with respect to the power rule in the way that x0 is "supposed to" (i.e. give x-1)
 
Office_Shredder said:
Just as a general rule of thumb, any time you get a solution of x0 that isn't really a solution, you should check to see if ln(x) is a solution. ln(x) differentiates with respect to the power rule in the way that x0 is "supposed to" (i.e. give x-1)

Yeh, right after I posted, I remember getting the second solution by reduction of order!
 
Note, by the way, that the euler type equation, [itex]a_nx^n y^{(n)}+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ a_1x y'+ a_0y= f(x)[/itex]
can be converted to an equation with constant coefficients by substituting t= ln(x) as independent variable.

Since, if m is a double root of the characteristic equation for an equation with constant coefficients, the solution involves both [itex]e^{mt}[/itex] and [itex]te^{mt}[/itex], solutions for the Euler type equation will involve [itex]e^{mln(x)}= e^{x^m}= x^m[/itex] and [itex]ln(x)x^m[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K