MHB Orthogonality of Eigenfunctions of Mixed Boundary Conditions

Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
$$
\left.(\phi_n\phi_m' - \phi_m\phi_n')\right|_0^L + (\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0
$$
where $\phi_{n,m}$ and $\lambda_{n,m}$ represent distinct modal eigenfunctions which satisfy mixed boundary conditions at $x = 0,L$ of the form
\begin{alignat*}{3}
a\phi(0) + b\phi'(0) & = & 0\\
c\phi(L) + d\phi'(L) & = & 0
\end{alignat*}
Show that the eigenfunctions are orthogonal.
$$
\int_0^L\phi_m\phi_m dx = 0.
$$
I not sure how to proceed since there are constants a,b,c,d.

If they weren't there, I would proceed as
$$
(\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = -\left.(\phi_n\phi_m' - \phi_m\phi_n')\right|_0^L
$$
\begin{alignat*}{3}
\phi(0) &= &-\phi'(0) \\
\phi(L) &=& -\phi'(L)
\end{alignat*}
Therefore,
$$
(\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0\iff \int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0
$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dwsmith said:
$$
\left.(\phi_n\phi_m' - \phi_m\phi_n')\right|_0^L + (\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0
$$
where $\phi_{n,m}$ and $\lambda_{n,m}$ represent distinct modal eigenfunctions which satisfy mixed boundary conditions at $x = 0,L$ of the form
\begin{alignat*}{3}
a\phi(0) + b\phi'(0) & = & 0\\
c\phi(L) + d\phi'(L) & = & 0
\end{alignat*}
Show that the eigenfunctions are orthogonal.
$$
\int_0^L\phi_m\phi_m dx = 0.
$$
I not sure how to proceed since there are constants a,b,c,d.

If they weren't there, I would proceed as
$$
(\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = -\left.(\phi_n\phi_m' - \phi_m\phi_n')\right|_0^L
$$
\begin{alignat*}{3}
\phi(0) &= &-\phi'(0) \\
\phi(L) &=& -\phi'(L)
\end{alignat*}
Therefore,
$$
(\lambda_m^2 - \lambda_n^2)\int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0\iff \int_0^L\phi_n\phi_m dx = 0
$$
You know that $a\phi_m(0) + b\phi'_m(0) = 0$ and $a\phi_n(0) + b\phi'_n(0) = 0$. Therefore $\dfrac{\phi'_m(0)}{\phi_m(0)} = \dfrac{\phi'_n(0)}{\phi_n(0)} = -\dfrac ab.$ It follows that $\phi_n(0)\phi_m'(0) - \phi_m(0)\phi_n'(0) = \phi_n(0)\phi_m(0)\Bigl(\dfrac{\phi'_m(0)}{\phi_m(0)} - \dfrac{\phi'_n(0)}{\phi_n(0)}\Bigr) = \phi_n(0)\phi_m(0)\Bigl(-\dfrac ab + \dfrac ab\Bigr) = 0.$ Similarly at the other endpoint $L$. I leave you to fret about what happens if there are any zeros on the denominators of those fractions.
 
Opalg said:
It follows that $\phi_n(0)\phi_m'(0) - \phi_m(0)\phi_n'(0) = \phi_n(0)\phi_m(0)\Bigl(\dfrac{\phi'_m(0)}{\phi_m(0)} - \dfrac{\phi'_n(0)}{\phi_n(0)}\Bigr) $

How did this come about?
 
I have the equation ##F^x=m\frac {d}{dt}(\gamma v^x)##, where ##\gamma## is the Lorentz factor, and ##x## is a superscript, not an exponent. In my textbook the solution is given as ##\frac {F^x}{m}t=\frac {v^x}{\sqrt {1-v^{x^2}/c^2}}##. What bothers me is, when I separate the variables I get ##\frac {F^x}{m}dt=d(\gamma v^x)##. Can I simply consider ##d(\gamma v^x)## the variable of integration without any further considerations? Can I simply make the substitution ##\gamma v^x = u## and then...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K