Poisson equation with a dirac delta source.

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of taking the Fourier transform of the equation ∇²V(𝑟) = δ(𝑟), leading to a solution resembling V(𝑟) ∼ 1/𝑟. It highlights the loss of homogeneous solutions during this transformation, as these solutions are not square integrable, which is a requirement for the Fourier transform. The conversation then shifts to comparing two formulations of the wave equation, emphasizing that the first formulation, which includes a delta function at t=0, is more general and can account for pre-existing conditions in the system. In contrast, the second formulation only describes the system for t>0, relying on initial conditions to encapsulate any prior states. Overall, the discussion underscores the importance of initial conditions and the nature of solutions in the context of differential equations and distributions.
Coffee_
Messages
259
Reaction score
2
Consider:

##\nabla^{2} V(\vec{r})= \delta(\vec{r})##

By taking the Fourier transform, the differential equation dissapears. Then by transforming that expression back I find something like ##V(r) \sim \frac{1}{r}##.

I seem to have lost the homogeneous solutions in this process. Where does this happen?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Taking the Fourier transform you are essentially saying that your domain is infinite and that your function (##V##) is square integrable. The homogeneous solution is not square integrable.
 
Thanks. Maybe you could get this one as well since you already bothered to answer so I don't have to make another post:

What's the difference in the evolution of ##f## for ##t>0## between saying

1) ##\partial_{x}^{2} f - \frac{1}{c^{2}} \partial_{t}^{2}f = -\delta(x) \delta(t)## where nothing is happening before ##t=0##

2) ##\partial_{x}^{2} f - \frac{1}{c^{2}} \partial_{t}^{2}f = 0 ## and to impose a delta peak as initial condition?
 
Essentially nothing, but depending a bit on which initial condition you put a delta in (the wave equation is second order in t and so needs two initial conditions).
 
I was talking about the condition on ##f##, the derivative condition is zero everywhere.

Is it correct to say that the first expression is more general. It can encompass the state of the system at ##t<0##. For example, if an oscillatory motion already exists before this delta peak, this expression can still be in agreement with it.

The second one is only a description for ##t>0## of a special case of the above description (namely, when everything is zero before the delta peak).
 
Well, if you have initial conditions, you are encoding anything that happened before that time in those conditions. So for solving it for future ##t## it does not really matter. But the domain of the other problem is larger, yes.
 
Well, it's all correct with your calculation of the Green function of the Laplace operator. The solution is not square integrable, because it's a distribution and not a function since the source is already a distribution. The Green's function in fact is
$$G(\vec{x})=-\frac{1}{4\pi |\vec{x}|} \; \Leftrightarrow \; \Delta G(\vec{x})=\delta^{(3)}(\vec{x}).$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
757
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
542
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
648
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K