Separable ODE, should I take the log of both sides?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving the separable ordinary differential equation (ODE) dy/dx = exp(x - y) with the initial condition y(0) = ln(2). The correct approach involves rearranging the equation to exp(y) dy = exp(x) dx, integrating both sides, and correctly applying logarithmic properties. The final solution is y(x) = ln(exp(x) + 1), confirmed by the software Maple, which highlights the importance of taking the logarithm of the entire right-hand side expression rather than separating terms incorrectly.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of separable ordinary differential equations
  • Knowledge of integration techniques
  • Familiarity with exponential and logarithmic functions
  • Experience with initial value problems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of logarithms, specifically log(a + b) ≠ log(a) + log(b)
  • Learn more about solving separable ODEs in detail
  • Explore the use of Maple for solving differential equations
  • Investigate initial value problems and their significance in ODE solutions
USEFUL FOR

Students studying differential equations, educators teaching calculus, and anyone looking to deepen their understanding of ODEs and their solutions.

JFonseka
Messages
117
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Solve dy/dx = exp(x-y) given that y = ln 2 at x = 0

Homework Equations


None.

The Attempt at a Solution



Firstly let's get the equation into a form so we can re-arrange the x's and y's, and then re-arrange.

dy/dx = exp(x)/exp(y)

exp(y)*dy = exp(x)*dx

Integrate:

exp(y) = exp(x) + C

Substitute:

exp(ln(2)) = exp(0) + C

2 = 1 + C, therefore C = 1

Hence, exp(y) = exp(x) + 1, and take log to get an equation in the form of y = ...

ln(exp(y)) = ln(exp(x)) + ln(1) =>

y = x

Doesn't really look right though, am I right or wrong?

Edit: Solved-> ln(exp(y)) = ln(exp(x) + 1)
=> y(x) = ln(exp(x) + 1)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Looked OK until the last step when you took the logs. log(a+b) isn't equal to log(a)+log(b).

Note also that the initial condition no longer holds if y=x was the solution.
 
I solved the problem using Maple; it gives the answer as y = ln(exp x + 1).

So I guess I'm meant to take the log of the entire expression on the r.h.s.
 

Similar threads

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