Question on variation of parameters - ODE

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the method of variation of parameters in the context of solving ordinary differential equations (ODEs). The original poster is exploring the implications of differing signs in the Wronskian when calculating coefficients for the solution.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the impact of switching the functions y1 and y2 on the Wronskian and the resulting coefficients. Questions are raised about whether there is a standard convention for labeling these functions and how this affects the overall solution.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the relationship between the Wronskian and the coefficients, noting that switching the functions leads to equivalent solutions. The discussion appears to be productive, with participants exploring different scenarios and confirming that the outcomes remain consistent despite variations in function labeling.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the original poster's lack of experience with linear algebra, which may influence their understanding of the concepts discussed. This context suggests a potential gap in foundational knowledge that could affect the interpretation of the problem.

cue928
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
I am working on a problem requiring variation of parameters. When I calculated the wronskian, I got an answer, which differed from the book only by a "-" (mine was -, the book's was +). So I switched my functions for y1 and y2 and got the answer the book had. Is there a standard for which should be which or does it work itself out either way through the course of the problem, once you start integrating?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I may be wrong, but your definition of y1 and y2 shouldn't matter. Because the Wronskian is given by a determinant, we know that switching y1 and y2 corresponds to switching a column and hence flips the sign of the Wronskian.

However, at the same time the formulas for the "coefficients" A(x) y1 + B(x) y2 also switch signs. This means that the answer should be the same regardless of which indexing scheme you give.
 
To be more precise, let's say that the book calculates the wrongskian to be W(x). Then the coefficients will be
[tex]A(x) = -\int \frac1W y_2(x) b(x) \ dx, \qquad B(x) = \int \frac1W y_1(x) b(x) \ dx[/tex]
where b(x) is the inhomogeneous factor. This gives
[tex]A(x) y_1(x) + B(x) y_2(x)[/tex]

Now if you calculate -W(x), and set [itex]\hat y_1 = y_2, \hat y_2 = y_1[/itex] then
[tex]\hat A(x) = -\int \frac1{-W} \hat y_2(x) b(x) \ dx, \qquad \hat B(x) = \int \frac1{-W} \hat y_1(x) b(x) \ dx[/tex]
And your solution will be
[tex]\hat A(x) \hat y_1(x) + \hat B(x) \hat y_2(x)[/tex]
but you can easily calculate [itex]\hat A(x) = B(x), \hat B(x) = A(x)[/itex] so your solution is equivalent to the first.
 
Yeah, I went ahead and ran through the two scenarios and got the same answer. I guess there could be two different answers on the wronskian that would produce the same answer. Haven't had linear algebra yet, but I suspect if I ever take it, I'll get some more insight. Thanks for your reply.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K