Question on assumptions made during variation of parameters

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the assumptions made during the derivation of the variation of parameters formula for nth degree equations, specifically the condition u1'y1(k) + u2'y2(k) + ... + un'yn(k) = 0 for k < n-1. This assumption leads to the matrix form WU' = X, where W is the Wronskian and U' is a vector of derivatives. Altering this assumption to equate the left-hand sum to a constant instead of zero complicates the solution process and results in different values for u, potentially leading to a more complex set of solutions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nth degree differential equations
  • Familiarity with the variation of parameters method
  • Knowledge of Wronskian determinants
  • Basic linear algebra concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the variation of parameters formula in detail
  • Explore the implications of modifying assumptions in differential equations
  • Learn about the Wronskian and its role in solving differential equations
  • Investigate the uniqueness of solutions in linear differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of differential equations, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of the variation of parameters method and its assumptions.

NoOne0507
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I was recently trying to prove the variation of parameters formula for an nth degree equation, and I have come up with a question about the assumptions made during the derivation.

During the derivation we assume that: u1'y1(k) + u2'y2(k) + . . . + un'yn(k) = 0
for k < n-1.

It leads to the matrix form: WU' = X, where W is the Wronskian, U' is a column vector consisting of the derivatives of each ui, and X is the solution vector that has f(t) in the nth row, and 0 in all the others.


My question is on the assumption: u1'y1(k) + u2'y2(k) + . . . + un'yn(k) = 0, k < n-1.

How would this the results of our solutions change if we instead assumed the left hand sum equaled some constant? It would have the same effect when the derivative is taken at each step, as the constant would go to 0 consistently.

I see it would lead to different values for u, as the solution to the system would be different. Would the answers simplify to the same values as assuming the sums are 0? Would it lead to different answers, and then be forced correct when applying initial conditions? Any thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
NoOne0507 said:
I was recently trying to prove the variation of parameters formula for an nth degree equation, and I have come up with a question about the assumptions made during the derivation.

During the derivation we assume that: u1'y1(k) + u2'y2(k) + . . . + un'yn(k) = 0
for k < n-1.

It leads to the matrix form: WU' = X, where W is the Wronskian, U' is a column vector consisting of the derivatives of each ui, and X is the solution vector that has f(t) in the nth row, and 0 in all the others.


My question is on the assumption: u1'y1(k) + u2'y2(k) + . . . + un'yn(k) = 0, k < n-1.

How would this the results of our solutions change if we instead assumed the left hand sum equaled some constant? It would have the same effect when the derivative is taken at each step, as the constant would go to 0 consistently.

I see it would lead to different values for u, as the solution to the system would be different. Would the answers simplify to the same values as assuming the sums are 0? Would it lead to different answers, and then be forced correct when applying initial conditions? Any thoughts?
It would make the equations more difficult to solve! The point is that there are an infinite number of solutions to the original differential equation and we are looking for one. We can make pretty nearly any simplifying assumptions we want. That just reduces the set of "possible" solutions we are looking for.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K