Ordinary Diffusion and integration by parts

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in ordinary 1D diffusion, specifically demonstrating that the mean value of the square of the position is equal to 2Dt. The original poster presents equations related to the probability density function and its time evolution, seeking to justify boundary conditions and assumptions regarding the behavior of the probability density at infinity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore integration by parts and the implications of boundary terms in the context of probability densities. Questions arise about justifying assumptions regarding the behavior of p(x,t) at the boundaries, particularly at x=0 and as x approaches infinity.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the necessity of evaluating boundary terms and the interpretation of probability densities. There is an ongoing exploration of how to handle indeterminate forms and the conditions under which certain assumptions about p(x,t) can be made.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the functional form of p(x,t) as x approaches infinity, emphasizing that it must be well-defined and normalizable. There is a recognition that assumptions about p(x,t) need careful consideration to avoid contradictions in the context of probability theory.

Old Guy
Messages
101
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


For ordinary 1D diffusion show that the mean value of the square of the position is equal to 2Dt


Homework Equations


[tex]\left\langle {x^2 \left( t \right)} \right\rangle \equiv \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} [/tex]

[tex]\frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right) = D\frac{{\partial ^2 }}{{\partial x^2 }}p\left( {x,t} \right)[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution


[tex]\begin{array}{l}<br /> \left\langle {x^2 \left( t \right)} \right\rangle \equiv \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} \\ <br /> \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}\left\langle {x^2 \left( t \right)} \right\rangle = \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}\int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} = \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} + \int\limits_0^\infty {p\left( {x,t} \right)\frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}x^2 dx} \\ <br /> \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}\left\langle {x^2 \left( t \right)} \right\rangle = \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} + \int\limits_0^\infty {p\left( {x,t} \right)\frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}x^2 dx} \\ <br /> \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}\left\langle {x^2 \left( t \right)} \right\rangle = \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} + \int\limits_0^\infty {p\left( {x,t} \right)\frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}x^2 dx} \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} = D\int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{{\partial ^2 }}{{\partial x^2 }}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} \\ <br /> u = x^2 \Rightarrow du = 2xdx \\ <br /> dv = \frac{{d^2 }}{{dx^2 }}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx \Rightarrow v = \frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right) \\ <br /> \int\limits_0^\infty {x^2 \frac{\partial }{{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} = Dx^2 \frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right) - 2D\int\limits_0^\infty {x\frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \int\limits_0^\infty {x\frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} \\ <br /> u = x \Rightarrow du = dx \\ <br /> dv = \frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx \Rightarrow v = p\left( {x,t} \right) \\ <br /> \int\limits_0^\infty {x\frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} = xp\left( {x,t} \right) - \int\limits_0^\infty {p\left( {x,t} \right)dx} \\ <br /> \end{array}[/tex]

I see that I'm home free if
[tex]Dx^2 \frac{d}{{dx}}p\left( {x,t} \right) = 0[/tex]
and

[tex] xp\left( {x,t} \right) = 0[/tex]

but how can I justify that?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Remember that when you integrate by parts, you have to evaluate the boundary term at the endpoints of the integral.
[tex]\int_a^b u\,\mathrm{d}v = uv\color{red}{\biggr|_a^b} - \int_a^b v\,\mathrm{d}u[/tex]
You're missing the part in red. You'll also need to make an assumption about the form of [itex]p(x,t)[/itex] as [itex]x\to \infty[/itex].
 
I understand, of course, about the boundary terms. It seems to work out if I assume that p(0,t)=1 (ie, the particle(s) all start at the origin) and that p([itex]\infty[/itex],t)=0 (there is nothing at the infinite boundary). This still leaves me multiplying zero times infinity, and isn't that considered to be indeterminate? So I still don't see how to make these terms vanish.
 
Old Guy said:
I understand, of course, about the boundary terms. It seems to work out if I assume that p(0,t)=1 (ie, the particle(s) all start at the origin)
nooo no no no, that's the wrong way to interpret p(x,t). It's a probability density. The probability itself that a particle is found between a and b at time t is given by [itex]P = \int_a^b p(x,t)\mathrm{d}x[/itex], and that integral can be very small even if [itex]p(x,t)=1[/itex] in the range in question. A probability density can go all the way up to infinity, as long as the integral is finite.

In any case, I don't think you can necessarily assume that p(0,t) = 1, but you don't need to.
Old Guy said:
and that p([itex]\infty[/itex],t)=0 (there is nothing at the infinite boundary). This still leaves me multiplying zero times infinity, and isn't that considered to be indeterminate?
This is why I said you have to assume something about the form of the probability density as [itex]x\to \infty[/itex], not at infinity. Infinity is always a limit in physics, so you will have to think about the functional form (linear, quadratic, exponential, etc.) of p(x,t) in the limit of very large x. You could try coming at it backwards: what form could p(x,t) take (at large x) such that the limit of xp(x,t) would not be well-defined? Then make your assumption that p(x,t) does not take such a form.
 
Thank you for your help, diazona. I still haven't completely wrapped my mind around probability densities yet. Nonetheless, with your suggestion (and some mathematical sleight of hand) I was able to satisfy myself that p(x,t) in the form of 2/x made the terms vanish as needed. A function that approaches 0 as x approaches infinity makes physical sense, to me, too. Thanks again!
 
You're welcome :wink: Just make sure your derivation doesn't require that p(x,t) = 2/x. You can assume that p(x,t) goes to zero as x goes to infinity at least as fast as 2/x because otherwise it wouldn't be normalizable, but it's not necessarily equal to 2/x.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K