Is the Sign of the Wronskian Arbitrary in Differential Equations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1MileCrash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sign Wronskian
1MileCrash
Messages
1,338
Reaction score
41
On my DE test, I was asked to determine if two solutions to a DE are fundamental solutions.

So I confirmed they were both solutions, and took the Wronskian, which was nonzero.

I got points marked off, and he put a minus sign in front of my wronskian result.

Isn't the sign of the Wronskian determined by what function I call y1 and what function I call y2 and is thus completely arbitrary?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes the sign on the Wronskian is determined by the ordering that you assign to the functions. It's a weak excuse, but the grader was probably just comparing your answer with their solution sheet and saw the sign difference and didn't think about why they were different.
 
Well, I looked at the test and on the paper the functions were called y1 and y2 already, and in my work I did write W[y1,y2] = my wronskian.

So I guess I can understand. I don't think I'll argue this one. I noticed that the wronskian order is arbitrary early off and have just been taking the easier derivative first.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top