Proof of Integration Factor for diff eq

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the existence of an integrating factor for a specific first-order exact differential equation. The original poster seeks assistance in demonstrating that if a certain condition involving partial derivatives holds, then an integrating factor can be expressed in terms of an exponential function of an integral.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the conditions for exactness of the differential equation and the implications of using an integrating factor. Questions arise about the proper application of partial derivatives and the interpretation of the integrating factor's dependence on variables.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on testing for exactness and clarifying the notation used in the discussion. There is an ongoing exploration of the relationship between the integrating factor and the partial derivatives involved. While some participants express confidence in their progress, others remain uncertain about specific steps in the proof.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the absence of explicit expressions for the functions involved, which complicates the demonstration of exactness. There is also mention of potential misunderstandings regarding notation and the limits of integration.

Ald
Messages
24
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Looking for help on this Exact first order differential equation problem. Thanks

Show that if ((partial M/partial t)-(partial N/partial y))/M=Q(y)

then the differential equation M(t,y)+N(t,y)dy/dt=0 has an integrating factor

μ(y)=exp(integral Q(y)dy).



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
If mu(y) is an integrating factor, then mu(y)*M(t,y)*dt+mu(y)*N(t,y)*dy=0 is exact. Is it? Try the usual test for exactness. BTW, be clear where the y dependence is in mu(y). It's not in the integration variable, that's just a dummy. y is one of the limits of integration.
 
Thanks for your help, yes your recommendation makes sense.

I assume these are the partial derivatives I take, there is no actual expression to take the partial of, how do I prove exactness?

partial(mu(y)*M(t,y))/partial dy=partial (mu(y)*N(t,y))/partial dt
 
Use your formula for mu(y). The partial derivative of mu(y) wrt to y can be written in a different way. The partial derivatives of M and N, you just write as partial derivatives. You are trying to show that mu is an integrating factor leads to the expression in the 'if' part of your statement.
 
I'm sorry what does 'wrt' mean?
 
wrt='with respect to'. What's the derivative of mu(y) with respect to y?
 
The only other way I could find to write the mu(y) was in the form mu(t,y)=1/(xM-yN) is this what you had in mind?
Thanks
 
Thanks Dick for getting me in right direction, I think I have it proved.
Thanks again
 
Ald said:
Thanks Dick for getting me in right direction, I think I have it proved.
Thanks again

Did it really work? You differentiated the exponential and used the chain rule, right? I'm kind of curious. I had to change [tex]e^{\int_0^y Q(t)dt}[/tex] by putting a negative sign inside the exp. You could also alter it by setting y as the lower limit, of course. Did you hit that snag?
 
  • #10
Attached is what I did, I haven't rewritten yet. Sometimes ignorance is bliss, I hope I did it right.
 

Attachments

  • #11
If ignorance is bliss, I'm experiencing it now. An attachment can take hours to clear approval.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K