PDE: Laplace's Equation solutions

dgreenheck
Messages
22
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Suppose that u(x,y) is a solution of Laplace's equation. If \theta is a fixed real number, define the function v(x,y) = u(xcos\theta - ysin\theta, xsin\theta + ycos\theta). Show that v(x,y) is a solution of Laplace's equation.

Homework Equations



Laplace's equation: uxx + uyy = 0.

Separated solutions

X''(x) - \lambdaX(x)=0.

Y''(y) - \lambdaY(y)=0.

Solutions for \lambda > 0

X(x) = A1ekx + A2e-kx

Y(y) = A3cosky + A4sinky.

Solutions for \lambda < 0

Y(y) = A1ekx + A2e-kx

X(x) = A3cosky + A4sinky.

The Attempt at a Solution



I began by trying to analyze each of the cases (\lambda>0, \lambda<0, \lambda=0) for the solution. But working these out would take forever and I know it isn't the most elegant way of doing it. My thinking is that I can somehow just differentiate the arguments for v(x,y) so I would get a factor of k2sin2\thetacos2\theta for uxx and -k2sin2\thetacos2\theta for uyy. Would this be a valid way of proving the statement to avoid doing all the work? Or is there a better way? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dgreenheck said:
My thinking is that I can somehow just differentiate the arguments for v(x,y) so I would get a factor of k2sin2\thetacos2\theta for uxx and -k2sin2\thetacos2\theta for uyy. Would this be a valid way of proving the statement to avoid doing all the work? Or is there a better way? Thanks.
That is perfectly fine and the way I would do it. It is also likely to be the way intended by whomever wrote the problem.
 
Separated solutions
X''(x) - λX(x)=0.
Y''(y) + λY(y)=0.there must be "+" , not "-"
 
by the way

therefore other equation will be changed
 
Your second strategy would perhaps work best. Since you are given that u satisfies Laplace's equation, it is perhaps a good idea to plug v into Laplace's equation and try to get it in terms of u. Your main tool for that will be the chain rule for scalar fields.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top