Is Understanding Green's Functions Essential When Using the Laplace Transform?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WiFO215
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions
AI Thread Summary
Green's functions are essential tools in solving differential equations, particularly in systems responding to impulse inputs. While the Laplace Transform is effective for problems like Simple Harmonic Oscillators, Green's functions offer advantages in various applications, including electromagnetic scattering. They provide automatic transfer functions and can be more versatile than the Laplace Transform in certain contexts. Understanding Green's functions is not overly complex, and integrating them into problem-solving early on is advisable, as they can enhance analytical capabilities and broaden the range of solvable problems.
WiFO215
Messages
416
Reaction score
1
This is the first time I've ever needed to use Green's functions while solving problems, although I've used the delta input in differential equations before to solve for systems with an 'impulse'. I am still trying to work my way around them and wanted to know how important they were.

I've used the Laplace Transform plenty of times before and am comfortable with it. I can solve the problems that I am presented with (Simple Harmonic Oscillators; Damped, undamped etc) far quicker using the method of the Laplace transform.

Would you guys recommend putting Green's functions away for later, or should I begin acquainting myself with these functions right from the start? Are they all that important? Why couldn't I just stick with the LT?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They can become very useful in that you automatically have the transfer function. In addition, they are useful for a variety of applications. I use Green's functions for electromagnetic scattering problems. Their potential usage goes beyond applications where you can use the Laplace transform.
 
Understanding how to use them is not all that difficult, so i see no reason to put them away for later.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
Back
Top