How to take the real part of this function

  • Thread starter Thread starter makethings
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around Stokes' Second Problem, specifically focusing on the mathematical challenge of extracting the real part of a complex velocity profile function. The function involves exponential terms and oscillatory components, with constants U, a, and H, and the variable y.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the method of finding the real part of a complex function using complex conjugation. Questions arise regarding the handling of multiple terms containing the imaginary unit i and the process of simplifying complex expressions.

Discussion Status

Several participants have offered insights into taking the complex conjugate and simplifying the expression. There is an ongoing examination of different approaches to arrive at the real part, with some noting discrepancies in their results, indicating a collaborative effort to clarify the calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of comfort with the mathematical complexity involved, and there are mentions of potential differences in results due to the tedious nature of the calculations. The discussion reflects a shared challenge in navigating the intricacies of complex functions.

makethings
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hello. I have been trying to solve Stokes Second Problem modified with a stationary upper plate (with oscillating bottom plate with velocity u(0,t) = U cos nt). I found my solution for the velocity profile but I can't simplify it since my math knowledge is limited.

Now you don't need to know what Stokes Second Problem is, but I need some help trying to take the Real part of this solution.

[tex] <br /> u(y,t) = Re\{U\frac{e^{a(H-y)} e^{i[a(H-y) +nt]} - e^{-a(H-y)} e^{-i[a(H-y) +nt]}}{ e^{aH} e^{iaH} - e^{-aH} e^{-iaH}}\}[/tex]

where U, a, H, are constants
the variable is y

appreciate any help. Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The real part of any function can be found using;

[tex]\text{Re} [f(y)]=\frac{f(y)+\overline{f(y)}}{2}[/tex]

where the overline denotes complex conjugation...does that help?
 
You might have to point me to a tutorial on taking complex conjugates of a function as complicated as mine. I know I can break down [tex]e^{iz} = cosz + i sinz[/tex] and perhaps take the conjugate as that cos - i sin ?? But with a function with multiple terms containing i, what would I do?
 
makethings said:
You might have to point me to a tutorial on taking complex conjugates of a function as complicated as mine. I know I can break down [tex]e^{iz} = cosz + i sinz[/tex] and perhaps take the conjugate as that cos - i sin ?? But with a function with multiple terms containing i, what would I do?

Assuming that U, a, H are all real, it is very simple to take the complex conjugate: Just change the signs of all the i's.
 
To clarify, is it changing the sign of the terms containing i, or i itself?
 
(In the following, z* denotes the complex conjugate of z.)
The first thing to do is to make the denominator real (you will see why this makes sense):

[tex] U<br /> \frac{<br /> \left(<br /> e^{a(H-y)}<br /> e^{i[a(H-y) +nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{-a(H-y)}<br /> e^{-i[a(H-y) +nt]}<br /> \right)<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> \right)^{*}<br /> }<br /> {<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> \right)<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> \right)^{*}<br /> }<br /> =[/tex]

[tex] U<br /> \frac{<br /> \left(<br /> e^{a(H-y)}<br /> e^{i[a(H-y) +nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{-a(H-y)}<br /> e^{-i[a(H-y) +nt]}<br /> \right)<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> \right)<br /> }<br /> {<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> \right)<br /> \left(<br /> e^{aH}<br /> e^{-iaH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-aH}<br /> e^{iaH}<br /> \right)<br /> }<br /> =[/tex]

[tex] U<br /> \frac{<br /> e^{a(2H-y)}<br /> e^{i[-ay+nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{-ay}<br /> e^{i[a(2H-y)+nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{ay}<br /> e^{-i[a(2H-y)+nt]}<br /> +<br /> e^{-a(2H-y)}<br /> e^{-i[-ay+nt]}<br /> }<br /> {<br /> e^{2aH}<br /> -<br /> e^{i2aH}<br /> -<br /> e^{-i2aH}<br /> +<br /> e^{-2aH}<br /> }<br /> =[/tex]

[tex] U<br /> \frac{<br /> e^{a(2H-y)}<br /> e^{i[-ay+nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{-ay}<br /> e^{i[a(2H-y)+nt]}<br /> -<br /> e^{ay}<br /> e^{-i[a(2H-y)+nt]}<br /> +<br /> e^{-a(2H-y)}<br /> e^{-i[-ay+nt]}<br /> }<br /> {<br /> 2\cosh(2aH)<br /> -<br /> 2\cos(2aH)<br /> }[/tex]

The real part of this expression is now easily seen (as described above) to be

[tex] U<br /> \frac{<br /> e^{a(2H-y)}<br /> \cos[-ay+nt]<br /> -<br /> e^{-ay}<br /> \cos[a(2H-y)+nt]<br /> -<br /> e^{ay}<br /> \cos[a(2H-y)+nt]<br /> +<br /> e^{-a(2H-y)}<br /> \cos[-ay+nt]<br /> }<br /> {<br /> \cosh(2aH)<br /> -<br /> \cos(2aH)<br /> }<br /> =[/tex]

[tex] 2U<br /> \frac{<br /> \cosh(a(2H-y))<br /> \cos[-ay+nt]<br /> -<br /> \cosh(ay)<br /> \cos[a(2H-y)+nt]<br /> }<br /> {<br /> \cosh(2aH)<br /> -<br /> \cos(2aH)<br /> }[/tex]

...I think. You should check it carefully. :smile:
 
Last edited:
makethings said:
To clarify, is it changing the sign of the terms containing i, or i itself?

Example:

If

[tex] z = \frac{a-bi}{c+id}e^{-ig}[/tex]

then

[tex] z^* = \frac{a+bi}{c-id}e^{+ig}[/tex]
 
Thanks..this math is tedious. I was working on it at the same time you were and we have ever so slightly different answers ( I got some - where you have + and I have a sinh appear).. now I got to nit pick and see where you or I went wrong. ugh.. lol Thanks though for doing that grunt work. appreciate it very much.
 
makethings said:
Thanks..this math is tedious. I was working on it at the same time you were and we have ever so slightly different answers ( I got some - where you have + and I have a sinh appear).. now I got to nit pick and see where you or I went wrong. ugh.. lol Thanks though for doing that grunt work. appreciate it very much.

I find that it's easier to do these kinds of calculations on a computer, using Tex.
As long as you use a "vertical" coding style (one term per line only), it won't get messy.

The ability to copy and paste really helps.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K