Query on indexing to determine coefficients

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bugatti79
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coefficients
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression for coefficients \( B_{ij} \) in a mathematical context, specifically focusing on the validity of the expression when certain indices are set to specific values. Participants are examining the implications of these values on the calculations and the conditions under which the expression is deemed invalid.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the validity of the expression for \( B_{ij} \) when \( i=1 \) and \( j=1,2,...N \), noting that the author claims it is not valid under these conditions.
  • Others point out that the only apparent restrictions are related to the denominators becoming zero, specifically when \( i+j=3 \), \( i+j=2 \), or \( i+j=1 \).
  • There is a discussion about the calculations for \( B_{11} \) and \( B_{1j} \), with some participants expressing confusion over how valid results can be obtained despite the indeterminate forms present when \( i=1 \) and \( j=1 \).
  • One participant notes an editing issue in the expression, suggesting that the terms inside the brackets should be separated by a minus and plus sign.
  • A later reply seeks clarification on whether the presence of an indeterminate term invalidates the entire equation for calculating \( B_{ij} \) when \( i=j=1 \).
  • Another participant asks for a link to the source of the question and mentions the context of converting a differential equation into a weak form, raising a question about the impact of approximation functions on the outcome.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the expression for specific values of \( i \) and \( j \), indicating that multiple competing interpretations exist regarding the conditions under which the expression can be applied. The discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential issues with indeterminate forms in the expression, but there is no consensus on how these affect the overall validity of the calculations. The discussion also touches on the implications of approximation functions in related contexts.

bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4
Folks,
I am interested to know what the author is doing in the following

##\displaystyle B_{ij}=EL ij (L)^{(i+j-1)} \left[ \frac{(i-1)(j-1)}{i+j-3} -\frac{2(ij-1)}{i+j-2}+\frac{(i+1)(j+1)}{i+j-1}\right]##

he states that this expression is not valid for ##B_{ij}## when ##i=1## and ##j=1,2,...N##

...yet he goes on to actually calculate

##B_{11}=4EIL##, ##B_{1j}=B_{j1}=2EIL^j##, ##(j>1)##

I understand the the numerator in the first 2 terms inside the big brakets are both 0 when i=j=1 but we still yield a value from the third term...
Any insight will be appreciated
Regards

PS:I notice there is some editing problem with the 3 terms inside the big brackets. There should be a minus and plus separating the terms.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
bugatti79 said:
Folks,
I am interested to know what the author is doing in the following

##\displaystyle B_{ij}=EL ij (L)^{(i+j-1)} \left[ \frac{(i-1)(j-1)}{i+j-3} -\frac{2(ij-1)}{i+j-2}+\frac{(i+1)(j+1)}{i+j-1}\right]##

he states that this expression is not valid for ##B_{ij}## when ##i=1## and ##j=1,2,...N##
That's not at all obvious. The only restrictions I see are that
1. i + j ≠ 3 (would make the first denominator vanish)
2. i + j ≠ 2 (would make the second denominator vanish)
3. i + j ≠ 1 (would make the third denominator vanish)
bugatti79 said:
...yet he goes on to actually calculate

##B_{11}=4EIL##, ##B_{1j}=B_{j1}=2EIL^j##, ##(j>1)##
I don't see how. With i = 1, j = 1, the second term in the brackets is 0/0.
bugatti79 said:
I understand the the numerator in the first 2 terms inside the big brakets are both 0 when i=j=1 but we still yield a value from the third term...
Any insight will be appreciated
Regards

PS:I notice there is some editing problem with the 3 terms inside the big brackets. There should be a minus and plus separating the terms.
 
Could you give a link to where you found this question?
 
Mark44 said:
I don't see how. With i = 1, j = 1, the second term in the brackets is 0/0.

Are you saying because one of the terms is indeterminate then the whole equation is invalid and thus cannot be usedt o calculate ##B_{ij}## for i=j=1?

micromass said:
Could you give a link to where you found this question?

See attached jpeg of question. The answer involves converting the DE into a weak form using a weight function w and splitting the differentiation between the weight function and the dependent variable u.
Would the choice of the approximation functions affect the outcome?

regards
 

Attachments

  • Question.jpg
    Question.jpg
    16.9 KB · Views: 354

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K