Legendre's Diff Eq using Frobenius

  • Thread starter Thread starter brew_guru
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diff eq Frobenius
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the Legendre polynomials using the Frobenius series solution to Legendre's differential equation. Participants address the challenge of expressing the solution in terms of P_n(x) while navigating through the series expansion and recursion relations. Key points include the realization that expanding around x=0 allows for a straightforward Taylor series approach, simplifying the derivation. The conditions for the coefficients a_0 and a_1 are clarified, indicating no restrictions on these constants. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of correctly applying series solutions to achieve the desired polynomial forms.
brew_guru
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show, by direct examination of the Frobenius series solution to Legendre's differential equation that;
P_n(x) = \sum_{k=0}^{N} \frac{(-1)^k(2n-k)!} {2^n k! (n-k)! (n-2k)!}x^{n-2k} ;\ N=\frac{n}{2}\ \mathrm{n\ even,}\ <br /> N=\frac{n-1}{2}\ \mathrm{n\ odd}

Write down the first five Legendre polynomials due to this formula. Show also that P_n(1)=1 and P_n(-1)=(-1)^n

Homework Equations


The Frobenius/Puiseux/Fuchs series solution is: y= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_{n}x^{k+n}
Legendre's Diff Eq is: (1-x^{2})y&#039;&#039;-2xy&#039;+l(l+1)=0

The Attempt at a Solution


y= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_{n}x^{k+n}<br /> y&#039;= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (k+n)a_{n}x^{k+n-1}<br /> y&#039;&#039;= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (k+n)(k+n-1)a_{n}x^{k+n-2}
Setting the x^k power to zero yields:
a_2 = \frac{k(k+1)-l(l+1)}{(k+2)(k+1)} a_0
Setting the x^{k+1} power to zero yields:
a_3 = \frac{(k+1)(k+2)+l(l+1)}{(k+3)(k+2)}a_1
I believe setting the x^{k-2}\ \mathrm{and}\ x^{k-1} powers yield:
k(k-1)a_0 = 0<br /> k(k+1)a_1 = 0
although this would seem to imply my first two constants are zero, which would make all higher order constants zero as well since each constant can be written in terms of an earlier constant. This is the first part I am stuck on, and the second is getting an answer in terms of P_n(x) instead of y(x). Thank you for any direct help or links to reading material!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
brew_guru said:

Homework Statement



Show, by direct examination of the Frobenius series solution to Legendre's differential equation that;
P_n(x) = \sum_{k=0}^{N} \frac{(-1)^k(2n-k)!} {2^n k! (n-k)! (n-2k)!}x^{n-2k} N=\frac{n}{2}\ \mathrm{n\ even}<br /> N=\frac{n-1}{2}\ \mathrm{n\ odd}

Write down the first five Legendre polynomials due to this formula. Show also that P_n(1)=1 and P_n(-1)=(-1)^n

Homework Equations


The Frobenius/Puiseux/Fuchs series solution is: y= \sum_{n=0}^{\inf} a_{n}x^{k+n}
Legendre's Diff Eq is: (1-x^{2})y&#039;&#039;-2xy&#039;+l(l+1)=0

The Attempt at a Solution


y= \sum_{n=0}^{\inf} a_{n}x^{k+n}<br /> y&#039;= \sum_{n=0}^{\inf} (k+n)a_{n}x^{k+n-1}<br /> y&#039;&#039;= \sum_{n=0}^{\inf} (k+n)(k+n-1)a_{n}x^{k+n-2}
Setting the x^k power to zero yields:
a_2 = \frac{k(k+1)-l(l+1)}{(k+2)(k+1)} a_0
Setting the x^{k+1} power to zero yields:
a_3 = \frac{(k+1)(k+2)+l(l+1)}{(k+3)(k+2)}a_1
I believe setting the x^{k-2}\ \mathrm{and}\ x^{k-1} powers yield:
k(k-1)a_0 = 0<br /> k(k+1)a_1 = 0
although this would seem to imply my first two constants are zero, which would make all higher order constants zero as well since each constant can be written in terms of an earlier constant. This is the first part I am stuck on, and the second is getting an answer in terms of P_n(x) instead of y(x). Thank you for any direct help or links to reading material!

Use the forward slash to close tex tags. You should also preview your posts to confirm they are displaying correctly. I fixed your tags so your post is readable. I don't have time right now to look at it but at least now someone might read it.
 
Last edited:
Since you're expanding about x0=0, which isn't a singular point of the differential equation, you can expand the solution as a plain old Taylor series:
$$y = \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n x^n$$You don't need to mess with the k+n nonsense. When you do this, you get the same recursion relation as before.

Note if you set k=0 in your work above, the conditions
\begin{align*}
k(k-1)a_0 &= 0 \\
k(k+1)a_1 &= 0
\end{align*} are satisfied automatically. There are no restrictions on a0 and a1.
 
Last edited:
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K