MHB Regular perturbation nonlinear problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations (ODEs) related to drug-receptor binding, where the user is attempting to analyze the system using regular perturbation methods with a small parameter, epsilon. Despite substituting asymptotic approximations, the resulting leading order problem remains nonlinear, complicating the analysis. The user has explored various parameter cases but is struggling specifically with the case where gamma equals epsilon. Suggestions include using numerical methods or series solutions to approximate the behavior of the solution, as the nonlinearity is primarily influenced by the parameters alpha and beta. The conversation highlights the challenges of applying perturbation techniques to nonlinear systems and the need for alternative solution methods.
Carla1985
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
Hi all, I have this (nondimensionalised) system of ODEs that I am trying to analyse:
\[
\begin{align}
\frac{dr}{dt}= &\ - \left(\alpha+\frac{\epsilon}{2}\right)r + \left(1-\frac{\epsilon}{2}\right)\alpha p - \alpha^2\beta r p + \frac{\epsilon}{2} \\
\frac{dp}{dt}= &\ \left(1-\frac{\epsilon}{2\alpha}\right)r - \left(1+\frac{\epsilon}{2}\right)p - \alpha\beta r p + \frac{\epsilon}{2\alpha}
\end{align}
\]
with initial conditions $r(0)=1, p(0)=0$ and $\epsilon$ is a small parameter. After substituting in the asymptotic approximations $r\approx r_0+\epsilon r_1+...$, $p\approx p_0+\epsilon p_1+...$ I get a leading order problem as
\[
\begin{align}
\frac{dr_0}{dt}= &\ - \alpha r_0 + \alpha p_0 -\alpha^2\beta r_0 p_0 \\
\frac{dp_0}{dt}= &\ r_0 - p_0 -\alpha\beta r_0 p_0
\end{align}
\]

Clearly, this is still of no help as it's still nonlinear. So my question is, is there any way of getting past this?

The only other piece of information I have is that at equilibrium the solution for both will be $O(\epsilon^{1/2})$. I did attempt to rescale for this but I then get a singular perturbation problem in which the limit of the inner solution is infinity so I could not do the matching (I will explain in more detail what I did for this if needed). If anyone could suggest a way in which I can solve this problem I would be very grateful.

Thank you!
Carla
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What are $$\alpha$$ and $$\beta$$? What we know about them?
 
The non-linearity has nothing to do with \epsilon but rather with \alpha and \beta.
 
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ are grouped parameters from how I did the nondimensionalisation. Basically the system is a type of drug-receptor binding system. After nondimensionalising I have 3 parameters: $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$. We know that $\alpha$ is $O(1)$ but have limit information about $beta$ and $gamma$. So we are trying to use asymptotic to explore these. To do this we fix one of the parameters to also be $O(1)$ and set the other to be either small ($\epsilon$) or large ($1/\epsilon$). I have done the cases of $\beta=\epsilon$, $\beta=1/\epsilon$ and $\gamma=1/\epsilon$ without too many issues. This one that I'm having trouble with is $\gamma=\epsilon$.

I understand the answer may well be that in this situation there is nothing I can do further but I thought I would ask in case there was something else I could do with it that I wasn't aware of. Either way I appreciate the help.

Thanks
Carla
 
In that case, I'd simply use either numerical methods to find out the behaviour of the solution, or use some sort of series solution to approximate the solution.
 
Carla1985 said:
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ are grouped parameters from how I did the nondimensionalisation. Basically the system is a type of drug-receptor binding system. After nondimensionalising I have 3 parameters: $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$. We know that $\alpha$ is $O(1)$ but have limit information about $beta$ and $gamma$. So we are trying to use asymptotic to explore these. To do this we fix one of the parameters to also be $O(1)$ and set the other to be either small ($\epsilon$) or large ($1/\epsilon$). I have done the cases of $\beta=\epsilon$, $\beta=1/\epsilon$ and $\gamma=1/\epsilon$ without too many issues. This one that I'm having trouble with is $\gamma=\epsilon$.

I understand the answer may well be that in this situation there is nothing I can do further but I thought I would ask in case there was something else I could do with it that I wasn't aware of. Either way I appreciate the help.

Thanks
Carla

In your ODEs in your OP I don't see any mention of a $\gamma$ there, where should it appear?
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top