Second (forth) order differential equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the second (fourth) order differential equation of the form y'''' + f(x)y'' = 0. Participants explore various approaches to find solutions or integral forms, particularly in cases where f(x) is complex and not easily expressed in closed form. The conversation includes attempts at formal manipulations and transformations, as well as critiques of those methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using Fourier transforms to derive an integral equation but struggles to isolate the transformed function.
  • Another participant proposes a formal approach by letting u = y'' and factoring the differential operator, but acknowledges uncertainty about the validity of this method.
  • Concerns are raised about the legitimacy of factoring differential operators, with one participant arguing that such operations are not permissible in this context.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of operator factoring, with examples provided to illustrate points, but disagreements persist regarding the correctness of the methods proposed.
  • Participants express confusion over the notation and definitions used in the proposed methods, particularly regarding the treatment of derivatives and the introduction of new variables.
  • One participant attempts to clarify their approach by providing a more detailed breakdown of their manipulations, but questions remain about the overall validity and applicability of the derived equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the proposed methods for solving the differential equation. There are multiple competing views on the appropriateness of the mathematical manipulations and the feasibility of the approaches suggested.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved mathematical steps, particularly in the manipulation of differential operators and the assumptions made about the functions involved. The discussion also highlights the complexity of the function f(x) and the challenges in finding solutions without closed forms.

rsq_a
Messages
103
Reaction score
1
Does anybody know of a way to attack the differential equation:

[tex] y'''' + f(x)y'' = 0[/tex]

In this case, you have to assume that f(x) is too complicated to be written down in closed-form. I don't need a closed form solution---an integral equation will do. I can take Fourier Transforms, then get the equation

[tex] (ik)^4\widehat{y} + (ik)^2 \int_{-\infty}^\infty \widehat{f}(s) \widehat{y}(k-s) \ ds = 0[/tex]

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem a way for me to isolate [tex]\widehat{y}[/tex]. Is there a standard technique for dealing with these things?

I know, for example, that the Airy equation, y'' = xy has no closed-form solution, but there is a way to put it into integral form. The trick, however, is that you need to know how to take the Fourier transform of xy (which you can).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
May I propose the following purely formal and unproven approach to this problem:

[tex]y''''+f(x)y''=0[/tex]

Let u=y'' to obtain:

[tex]u''+f(x)u=0[/tex]
[tex](D^2+f(x))u=0[/tex]

How about we factor that?

[tex](D+i\sqrt{f})(D-i\sqrt{f})u=0[/tex]

Now let:

[tex](D-i\sqrt{f})u=g(x)[/tex]

then we have:

[tex](D+i\sqrt{f})g=0[/tex]

[tex]g(x)=e^{-i\int \sqrt{f}+c}=ce^{-i\int\sqrt{f}}[/tex]

Then:

[tex](D-i\sqrt{f})u=ce^{-i\int\sqrt{f}}[/tex]

Turn the crank one more time and I get:

[tex]u=c_1e^{i\int\sqrt{f}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{f}}+c_2\right)[/tex]

Integrate twice and I get:

[tex]y(x)=c_1\iint e^{i\int\sqrt{f}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{f}}+c_2\right)[/tex]

Is that right guys? I'm not sure.

Why don't we move this to the DE sub-forum too?
 
Last edited:
jackmell said:
May I propose the following purely formal and unproven approach to this problem:

[tex]y''''+f(x)y''=0[/tex]

Let u=y'' to obtain:

[tex]u''+f(x)u=0[/tex]
[tex](D^2+f(x))u=0[/tex]

How about we factor that?

[tex](D+i\sqrt{f})(D-i\sqrt{f})u=0[/tex]

Now let:

[tex](D-i\sqrt{f})u=g(x)[/tex]

then we have:

[tex](D+i\sqrt{f})g=0[/tex]

[tex]g(x)=e^{-i\int \sqrt{f}}[/tex]

Then:

[tex](D-i\sqrt{f})u=e^{-i\int\sqrt{f}}[/tex]

Turn the crank one more time and I get:

[tex]u=e^{i\int\sqrt{f}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{f}}+c\right)[/tex]

Integrate twice and I get:

[tex]y(x)=\iint e^{i\int\sqrt{f}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{f}}+c\right)[/tex]

Is that right guys? I'm not sure.

Why don't we move this to the DE sub-forum too?

Hmm...I was going to say that this was brilliant. And then I realized that...

[tex](D^2+f(x)) \neq (D+i\sqrt{f})(D-i\sqrt{f})[/tex]

I don't think you're allowed to factor operators like that. For example,

[tex]\frac{d^2}{dx^2} - x \neq \left(\frac{d}{dx} - \sqrt{x}\right)\left(\frac{d}{dx} + \sqrt{x}\right) = \frac{d^2}{dx^2} - \frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{x}) + \sqrt{x}\frac{d}{dx} - x[/tex]

I don't think the approach can be rescued...

...for a moment, I thought you had presented a method which essentially allows one to solve any linear differential equation (since any linear operator could have been factored into factors with single derivatives)...
 
rsq_a said:
Hmm...I was going to say that this was brilliant. And then I realized that...

[tex](D^2+f(x)) \neq (D+i\sqrt{f})(D-i\sqrt{f})[/tex]

I don't think you're allowed to factor operators like that.
Sure you are. For example, consider y'' - 3y' + 2y = 0.
Written using operators, this is (D2 - 3D + 2)y = 0.
Factoring the quadratic, we get (D - 2)(D - 1)y = 0.
So (D - 2)y = 0 or (D - 1)y = 0, which leads us to y = e2t or y = et as basic solutions for this differential equation.
rsq_a said:
For example,

[tex]\frac{d^2}{dx^2} - x \neq \left(\frac{d}{dx} - \sqrt{x}\right)\left(\frac{d}{dx} + \sqrt{x}\right) = \frac{d^2}{dx^2} - \frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{x}) + \sqrt{x}\frac{d}{dx} - x[/tex]

I don't think the approach can be rescued...

...for a moment, I thought you had presented a method which essentially allows one to solve any linear differential equation (since any linear operator could have been factored into factors with single derivatives)...
 
Mark44 said:
Sure you are. For example, consider y'' - 3y' + 2y = 0.
Written using operators, this is (D2 - 3D + 2)y = 0.
Factoring the quadratic, we get (D - 2)(D - 1)y = 0.
So (D - 2)y = 0 or (D - 1)y = 0, which leads us to y = e2t or y = et as basic solutions for this differential equation.

Yes, can you provide an example without constant coefficients?
 
rsq_a said:
I don't think the approach can be rescued...

Hello rsq. How about I try?

Yes, I made a terrible blunder above by mis-handling the operators. What I believe is:

[tex](D+i\sqrt{g})(D-i\sqrt{g})u=(D^2+(g-d\sqrt{g})u=0[/tex]

so that IF we have the equation:

[tex]u''+(g-d\sqrt{g})u=0[/tex]

then we can use my analysis above and arrive at:

[tex] u=c_1e^{i\int\sqrt{g}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{g}}+c_2\right)[/tex]

Therefore for the equation:

[tex]u''+fu=0[/tex]

then let:

[tex]f=g-d\sqrt{g}=g-1/2 g^{-1/2}\frac{dg}{dt}[/tex]

and solve for the unknown g(t).

Once we solve for g(t), then the solution for the original equation:

[tex]u''+fu=0[/tex]

is:

[tex] u=c_1e^{i\int\sqrt{g}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{g}}+c_2\right)[/tex]

and by association:

[tex] y(x)=c_1\iint e^{i\int\sqrt{g}}\left(\int e^{-2i\sqrt{g}}+c_2\right)[/tex]

I believe it's not hard to test that expression numerically in Mathematica.
 
Last edited:
jackmell said:
Hello rsq. How about I try?

Yes, I made a terrible blunder above by mis-handling the operators. What I believe is:

[tex](D+i\sqrt{g})(D-i\sqrt{g})u=(D^2+(g-d\sqrt{g})u=0[/tex]

Have I missed something? I don't understand.

It seems you've defined d to be,

[tex]d\sqrt{g} = -iD\sqrt{g} + i\sqrt{g}D[/tex]

but then afterwards...

[tex]f=g-d\sqrt{g}=g-1/2 g^{-1/2}\frac{dg}{dt}[/tex]

This I don't understand. Now you treat d like a regular derivative? Perhaps this is just a problem with notation. Why don't you apply it to a concrete example? Suppose that

[tex]u'' - xu = (D^2 - x)u[/tex]

...
 
Last edited:
rsq_a said:
Have I missed something? I don't understand.

It seems you've defined d to be,

[tex]d\sqrt{g} = -iD\sqrt{g} + i\sqrt{g}D[/tex]

but then afterwards...

[tex]f=g-d\sqrt{g}=g-1/2 g^{-1/2}\frac{dg}{dt}[/tex]

This I don't understand. Now you treat d like a regular derivative? Perhaps this is just a problem with notation. Why don't you apply it to a concrete example? Suppose that

[tex]u'' - xu = (D^2 - x)u[/tex]

...

I forgot an i factor:

[tex] \begin{aligned}<br /> (D+i\sqrt{g})(D-i\sqrt{g})w&=(D+i\sqrt{g})(w'-i\sqrt{g}w) \\<br /> &=w''-i\frac{d}{dx}(\sqrt{g}w)+i\sqrt{g}w'+gw \\<br /> &=w''-i(\sqrt{g}w'+1/2wg^{-1/2}g')+i\sqrt{g}w'+gw \\<br /> &=w''-i\sqrt{g}w'-1/2iwg^{-1/2}g'+i\sqrt{g}w'+gw \\<br /> &=w''+(g-1/2ig^{-1/2}g')w\\<br /> &=w''+(g+id \sqrt{g})w<br /> \end{aligned}[/tex]

so that I'm defining:

[tex]d\sqrt{g}=-1/2g^{-1/2}g'[/tex]

Do you agree that this is correct?(2) Also, I glossed-over the fact that the equation:

[tex]f=g-1/2i\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{dg}{dx}[/tex]

is tough to solve symbolically. So for your example with plus sign to make it simpler:

[tex]u''+xu=0[/tex]

I would have to solve:

[tex]2x=2g-\frac{i}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{dg}{dx}[/tex]

which I don't know how to solve analytically. However, I can solve:

[tex]2=2g-\frac{i}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{dg}{dx}[/tex]

which could be a check for the equation:

[tex]u''+u=0[/tex]

that is, does my complicated formula above reduce to the known solution to this equation? Don't know yet. :)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
12K