Initial Value Problem for a System of Linear Differential Equations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving an initial value problem for a system of linear differential equations. Participants explore methods for solving the equations, including diagonalization and substitution techniques, while addressing potential errors in the formulation of the equations and their solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a system of linear differential equations and questions whether to solve the homogeneous part first before the inhomogeneous part.
  • Another participant suggests diagonalizing the matrix associated with the system to facilitate solving the equations.
  • Concerns are raised about the correctness of the matrix entries, particularly the bottom right entry, prompting a revision of the equations.
  • Participants discuss the substitution of variables to decouple the equations, with one explaining that this allows for independent solutions of each equation.
  • There is a proposal to express the system in a form that leads to decoupled linear inhomogeneous differential equations, with specific matrices provided for diagonalization.
  • Multiple participants express uncertainty about the necessity and implications of the substitution process.
  • One participant attempts to derive solutions for the decoupled equations, leading to further questions about the correctness of the results and their fit within the original equations.
  • Another participant confirms that the derived solutions appear correct but expresses concern over potential mismatches when substituting back into the original equations.
  • The discussion includes attempts to verify the solutions by substituting them back into the original set of equations, with some participants noting discrepancies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of matrix entries and the necessity of certain substitutions. There is no consensus on the final solutions, as some participants find discrepancies when substituting back into the original equations.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the correctness of the matrix entries and the implications of the substitution process. Participants have not reached a definitive conclusion on the validity of the solutions derived from the decoupled equations.

  • #31
We have

$$A=\begin{pmatrix}-(m_0+m_1) & m_1 & 0 \\ m_1 & -(m_1+m_2+m_3) & m_3 \\ 0 & m_3 & -(m_3+m_4)\end{pmatrix}$$

$$C=\begin{pmatrix}45m_0\\20\\35m_4\end{pmatrix}$$

So, we have to solve $X=-A^{-1}C$ subject to $z>x$, right?? (Wondering)

- - - Updated - - -

I like Serena said:
I believe you're supposed to find the solution for $X = X(t)$, which contains factors $e^{\lambda t}$.
Those terms with $e^{\lambda t}$ will not and cannot be zero. (Wasntme)

We will get three relations of the form $e^{\lambda t}=0$, right?? What does this mean?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
mathmari said:
We have

$$A=\begin{pmatrix}-(m_0+m_1) & m_1 & 0 \\ m_1 & -(m_1+m_2+m_3) & m_3 \\ 0 & m_3 & -(m_3+m_4)\end{pmatrix}$$

$$C=\begin{pmatrix}45m_0\\20\\35m_4\end{pmatrix}$$

So, we have to solve $X=-A^{-1}C$ subject to $z>x$, right?? (Wondering)

Yep. (Smile)

- - - Updated - - -

We will get three relations of the form $e^{\lambda t}=0$, right?? What does this mean?? (Wondering)

I'm not so sure that's what we will get. How did you get it? (Wondering)
If we would, there would be no solution. (Wasntme)
 
  • #33
I like Serena said:
Yep. (Smile)

How can we find the inverse of $A$?? I got stuck right now...
 
  • #34
I like Serena said:
I'm not so sure that's what we will get. How did you get it? (Wondering)
If we would, there would be no solution. (Wasntme)

$\lambda$ is negative... So, that means that $t \rightarrow +\infty$, or not?? (Wondering)
 
  • #35
mathmari said:
$\lambda$ is negative... So, that means that $t \rightarrow +\infty$, or not?? (Wondering)

If $e^{\lambda t} = 0$. What is the reason you think it is? (Wondering)
 
  • #36
mathmari said:
How can we find the inverse of $A$?? I got stuck right now...

I'm not quite clear on the problem.
Aren't all $m_i$ values given? (Wondering)
Wouldn't it only be $m_1$ that we make variable?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
766
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K