Laplace Transformation Question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion centers around solving a second-order ordinary differential equation using Laplace transformations. The equation presented is Y'' + tY' + 2Y = 0, with initial conditions Y(0) = 0 and Y'(0) = 1. Participants are exploring the implications of the terms involved and the challenges posed by the integration process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to manipulate the equation into a solvable form but encounters difficulties integrating due to the presence of a constant term. Some participants suggest alternative methods, such as using an integrating factor, to address the first-order differential equation derived from the original problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, verifying calculations, and suggesting techniques. There is acknowledgment of the complexity involved, particularly with the integration leading to expressions involving the error function. While some techniques have been proposed, there is no explicit consensus on a straightforward solution.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the challenges of integrating functions that arise from the transformation process and the limitations of certain methods in this context. The original poster expresses uncertainty about the notation and the integration process, indicating a learning curve in using the forum and the mathematical symbols involved.

Applejacks
Messages
33
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Use Laplace transformations to solve:
Y''+tY'+2Y=0, Y(0)=0, Y'(0)=1

Homework Equations



Y''==>[itex]s^{2}[/itex]y-sY(0)-Y'(0)=[itex]s^{2}[/itex]y-1
tY'==>-(y+sy')
2Y==>2y

The Attempt at a Solution



The question felt pretty straightforward till I hit a rock.[itex]s^{2}[/itex]y-1+y-sy'=0

y'=[itex]\frac{1}{s}[/itex](y([itex]s^{2}[/itex]+1)-1)

My problem is that I can't integrate this because of the -1. What to do? Am I on the right track?

(First time using these forums and symbols so give me a sec to fix them up. Not sure why the S is coming out weird.)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Applejacks,

I verified your calculations, and I think you are on the right track. The [itex]-1[/itex] does indeed preclude the use of separation of variables to solve the ODE for [itex]y(s)[/itex]. If I put that ODE into Maple I get a complicated expression involving the error function, so it does not look like there's an easy way; maybe you could look up the integral in, for example, Abramowitz and Stegun.

Cheers,
Kurt

P.S. According to Maple the solution of your ODE with boundary conditions is [tex]Y(t)=t \exp{(-t^2/2)}.[/tex]
 
Rearranging terms a little, you get
[tex]sy' - (s^2+1)y = -1[/tex]which is a first-order differential equation. I'd try solving it using an integrating factor.
 
Hi,

Indeed, vela, I had forgotten about that technique. Upon investigation I find that it does not make the problem much easier, however. By using the integrating factor technique, I recast the first-order ODE for [itex]y(s)[/itex] into the following form: [tex]\frac{d}{ds}\left(\frac{1}{s}\exp{\left(-\frac{s^2}{2}\right)}y(s)\right)=-\frac{1}{s}\exp{\left(-\frac{s^2}{2}\right)}.[/tex] Integrating this equation requires integration of the Gaussian function on the right hand side, which leads to an expression involving an error function (in agreement with the Maple output I mentioned earlier).

Cheers,
Kurt

P.S. That the expression for [itex]y(s)[/itex] contains an error function can also be seen by taking the Laplace transform of the known solution [itex]Y(t)=t\exp(-t^2/2)[/itex] that I posted earlier.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K