- #1

- 287

- 0

[tex]

u_t-u_{xx}=0

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=x(2-x)

x\in[0,2]

[/tex]

[tex]

u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0

t\in[0,2]

[/tex]

Verify that u(x,t)=u(2-x,t) is a solution.

To do this would I just show that:

u(0,t)=u(2,t)

u(2-x,0)=(2-x) but off by a scalar.

- Thread starter chaotixmonjuish
- Start date

- #1

- 287

- 0

[tex]

u_t-u_{xx}=0

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=x(2-x)

x\in[0,2]

[/tex]

[tex]

u(0,t)=u(2,t)=0

t\in[0,2]

[/tex]

Verify that u(x,t)=u(2-x,t) is a solution.

To do this would I just show that:

u(0,t)=u(2,t)

u(2-x,0)=(2-x) but off by a scalar.

- #2

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,832

- 251

I'm confused …… u(2-x,0)=(2-x) but off by a scalar.

u(2-x,0) = (2-x)(2-(2-x)) = … ?

- #3

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 41,833

- 961

- #4

- 287

- 0

Oh geeze, so how do I verify this?

- #5

- 287

- 0

I got u(2-x(2-x),0)=...=u(x^2,0)

- #6

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,832

- 251

- #7

- 287

- 0

Whoops, I meant this:

[tex]

u(x,t)=u(2-x,t)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=u(2-x)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=(2-x)(2-(2-x))

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=x(2-x)

[/tex]

This satisifies the initial condition.

[tex]

u(x,t)=u(2-x,t)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=u(2-x)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=(2-x)(2-(2-x))

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=x(2-x)

[/tex]

This satisifies the initial condition.

Last edited:

- #8

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,832

- 251

(erm … why bother with LaTeX when you could just have typed it as text? )

Yup … that nails the middle condition …Whoops, I meant this:

[tex]

u(x,t)=u(2-x,t)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=u(2-x)

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=(2-x)(2-(2-x))

[/tex]

[tex]

u(x,0)=x(2-x)

[/tex]

This satisifies the initial condition.

and the third one is easy …

now how about u

- #9

- 287

- 0

I'm having problems just getting why we only used 2-x in the substitution

- #10

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,832

- 251

Because we were seeing what happens if u(x,t) = u(2-x,t),I'm having problems just getting why we only used 2-x in the substitution

and for that we needed to know what u(2-x,t) is for t = 0, ie u(2-x,0).

- #11

- 287

- 0

So it that why we can pop a 2-x in for u?

- #12

- 121

- 0

- #13

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 41,833

- 961

YouSo it that why we can pop a 2-x in for u?

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 785

- Last Post

- Replies
- 34

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 0

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 763

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 866

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 862