MHB Linear differential equation of first order in EXP(C)

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the existence of solutions for a first-order linear differential equation in the ring of exponential sums EXP(C). Key points include that solutions exist under certain conditions related to the parameters a and b, and the coefficients α_i and μ_i. Specifically, if aμ_i + b = 0 for any non-zero α_i, there is no solution; if all α_i are zero and aμ_i + b = 0, there are infinitely many solutions. The participants also clarify the independence of the exponential basis and suggest that the reasoning presented is mostly correct, with an emphasis on explicitly stating the conditions for solution existence. The conversation concludes with a consensus on the conditions under which solutions may or may not exist.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I want to check if there is a solution of a linear differential equation of first order in the ring of exponential sums $\text{EXP}(\mathbb{C})$. I have done the following: The general linear differential equation of first order is $$ax'(z)+bx(z)=y(z) \tag{*}$$
where $x,y \in \text{EXP}(\mathbb{C})$.

We have that $$y(z)=\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}, \ \ x(z)=\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i e^{k_i z} \ \ \text{ so } \ \ x'(z)=\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i k_i e^{k_i z}$$

$$(*) \Rightarrow a\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i k_i e^{k_i z}+b\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i e^{k_i z}= \sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z} \Rightarrow \sum_{i=1}^N \left [a\beta_i k_i +b\beta_i \right ]e^{k_i z}=\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}$$ For $k_i=\mu_i$ we have the following:

$$\sum_{i=1}^N \left [\beta_i (a\mu_i +b) \right ]e^{\mu_i z}=\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z} \Rightarrow \sum_{i=1}^N \left [(a \mu_i +b)\beta_i -\alpha_i\right ]e^{\mu_i z}=0$$ 1. If for at least one $i$ with $\alpha_i\ne0$ we have $a\mu_i+b=0$, there is no solution.

2. If for at least one $i$ with $\alpha_i = 0$ we have $a\mu_i+b \neq 0$, we have that $\beta_i=0$.

3. If for all $i$ it holds that $\alpha_i = 0 \land a\mu_i+b = 0$, then thee are infinitely many solutions.

4. If for all $i$ it holds that $\alpha_i\ne0 \land a\mu_i+b\ne0$, then there is exactly one solution, with $\beta_i=\frac{\alpha_i}{a\mu_i+b}$.
Is everything correct? Have I forgotten a case? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I did it also as follows by taking cases:
  • $\textbf{Case 1.}$
    $a=0, b \neq 0$

    Then we have $bx(z)=y(z)$.
    So, the solution is $$x(z)=\frac{1}{b}y(z) \in \text{EXP}(\mathbb{C})$$
  • $\textbf{Case 2.}$
    $a\neq 0, b=0$

    Then we have $ax'(z)=y(z)$.

    We have that $\displaystyle{x'(z)=\frac{1}{a}y(z)}$, where $\displaystyle{y(z)=\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}}$, so $\displaystyle{x'(z)=\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}}$.
    • If $\exists j$ such that $\mu_j =0 \land \alpha_j \neq 0$ then $\displaystyle{x'(z)=\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=1}^{j-1} \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}+\frac{\alpha_j}{a}+\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=j+1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}}$ then $\displaystyle{x(z)=\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=1}^{j-1} \frac{\alpha_i}{\mu_i} e^{\mu_i z}+\frac{\alpha_j}{a}z+\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=j+1}^N \frac{\alpha_i}{\mu_i} e^{\mu_i z}} \notin \textbf{EXP}{(\mathbb{C})}$. So, there is no solution.
    • If $\mu_i \neq 0$ for $i$ for which $\alpha_i \neq 0$ then the solution is $\displaystyle{x(z)=\frac{1}{a}\sum_{i=1}^N \frac{\alpha_i}{\mu_i} e^{\mu_i z}}\in \text{EXP}(\mathbb{C})$.
  • $\textbf{Case 3.}$
    $a=0, b=0$

    Then we have $0=y(z)$.
    • If $y(z)=0$ then we have infinitely many solutions.
    • If $y(z) \neq 0$ then we have no solution.
  • $\textbf{Case 4.}$
    $a \neq 0, b \neq 0$

    Then we have $$ax'(z)+bx(z)=y(z) \Rightarrow x'(z)+\frac{b}{a} x(z)=\frac{1}{a}y(z) \ \ \ \ \ (*)$$

    We have that $$y(z)=\sum_{i=0}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}, x(z)=\sum_{i=0}^N \beta_i e^{k_i z}=\beta_0 +\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i e^{k_i z}, also x'(z)=\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i k_i e^{k_i z} $$

    $$(*) \Rightarrow \sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i k_i e^{k_i z}+\frac{b}{a} \left [\beta_0 +\sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i e^{k_i z}\right ]=\frac{1}{a} \left [\sum_{i=0}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z}\right ] \\
    \Rightarrow \frac{b}{a}\beta_0 +\sum_{i=1}^N \left [\beta_i k_i +\frac{b}{a}\beta_i \right ]e^{k_i z}=\frac{1}{a}\alpha_0+\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{\mu_i z} $$

    So, the following must hold:

    $$\left\{\begin{matrix}
    \frac{b}{a}\beta_0=\frac{1}{a}\alpha_0\\
    \beta_i k_i+\frac{b}{a}\beta_i=\alpha_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N\\
    k_i=\mu_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N
    \end{matrix}\right. \Rightarrow \left\{\begin{matrix}
    \beta_0=\frac{\alpha_0}{b}\\
    \beta_i \mu_i+\frac{b}{a}\beta_i=\alpha_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N\\
    k_i=\mu_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N
    \end{matrix}\right. \Rightarrow \left\{\begin{matrix}
    \beta_0=\frac{\alpha_0}{b}\\
    \beta_i \left (\mu_i+\frac{b}{a}\right )=\alpha_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N\\
    k_i=\mu_i, \ \ i=1, \dots , N
    \end{matrix}\right. $$
    • If $\displaystyle{\mu_i \neq -\frac{b}{a}}$, then the solution is $\displaystyle{x(z)=\frac{\alpha_0}{b}+\sum_{i=1}^N \frac{\alpha_i}{\mu_i+\frac{b}{a}}e^{\mu_i z}}$.
    • If $\displaystyle{\mu_i=-\frac{b}{a}}$ then if $\alpha_i=0$ then there are infinitely many solutions, but if $\alpha_i \neq 0$ then there is no solution.
Is this correct? Have I taken into consideration all the possible cases? (Wondering)
 
Hey mathmari! (Wave)

It seems you assume that $\{ e^{\mu_i z} \}$ forms an independent basis as long as the $\mu_i$ are distinct.
However, that is not the case.
For instance $1\cdot e^{i\pi/2 z} = -1 \cdot e^{-i\pi/2 z}$.
(Worried)
 
Last edited:
I like Serena said:
It seems you assume that $\{ e^{\mu_i z} \}$ forms an independent basis as long as the $\mu_i$ are distinct.
However, that is not the case.
For instance $1\cdot e^{i\pi/2} = -1 \cdot e^{-i\pi/2}$.
And $2e^{1+i} + 3e^{2+i} = (2e+3e^2)e^i$.
(Worried)

Ahaa... Ok... (Thinking)
And what could I change? (Wondering)
 
I like Serena said:
Hey mathmari! (Wave)

It seems you assume that $\{ e^{\mu_i z} \}$ forms an independent basis as long as the $\mu_i$ are distinct.
However, that is not the case.
For instance $1\cdot e^{i\pi/2 z} = -1 \cdot e^{-i\pi/2 z}$.
(Worried)

mathmari said:
Ahaa... Ok... (Thinking)
And what could I change? (Wondering)

Nevermind, I think $\{ e^{\mu_i z} :i=0..N, \text{ distinct } \mu_i\in \mathbb C \}$ does form a basis.
So I think your reasoning is correct, although you should probably mention that. (Thinking)
 
I like Serena said:
Nevermind, I think $\{ e^{\mu_i z} :i=0..N, \text{ distinct } \mu_i\in \mathbb C \}$ does form a basis.
So I think your reasoning is correct, although you should probably mention that. (Thinking)

Do you mean that I should mention that $\{ e^{\mu_i z} :i=0..N, \text{ distinct } \mu_i\in \mathbb C \}$ forms a basis? So, in the ring $\text{EXP}(\mathbb{C})$ the linear differential equation of first order has always a solution except at the following cases:
  • $a \neq 0 \land b =0 \land \mu_j =0 \land \alpha_j \neq 0$
  • $a=0 \land b=0 \land y \neq 0$
  • $a \neq 0 \land b \neq 0 \land \mu_i =-\frac{b}{a} \land \alpha_i \neq 0$

Is this correct? (Wondering)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
333
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K