Series Solution of Differential equations

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the series solution of the differential equation y' = 2xy, as presented in the context of Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences by Boas. Participants are exploring how to derive a specific relationship between the coefficients of the series representation of the solution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to manipulate series notation to derive the relationship na_n = 2a_{n-2}. Questions arise about the necessity of expanding series and how to properly change indices to match terms in the series.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights on manipulating series and changing indices, while others express confusion about the expansion process and the implications of omitting x from the expressions. There is an ongoing exploration of how to equate coefficients effectively without fully expanding the series.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the notation and the implications of dummy indices in series, as well as the constraints of deriving results without complete expansions. The discussion reflects a mix of understanding and uncertainty regarding the manipulation of series in the context of differential equations.

Husaaved
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
Working through Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences by Boas, on the chapter on Series Solutions of Differential Equations, Boas works the example:

[itex]y' = 2xy[/itex]

Boas differentiates the series representation of y yielding y', substitutes both into the original equation, and expands, showing that

[itex]na_n = 2a_{n-2}[/itex]

I see that this is true from expanding each series representation and equating coefficients and so on, but I am having trouble deriving this result from the series notation. Is expansion absolutely necessary to obtain this result, or is there something I'm missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's something you're missing. What trouble do you run into?
 
Oops, miss post
 
So, when I change the indices, I'm getting:

[itex]\sum_{n=1}^\infty na_nx^{n-1} = \sum_{n=1}^\infty 2a_{n+1}x^{n+2}[/itex]

or

[itex]\sum_{n=0}^\infty (n+1)a_{n+1}x^{n} = \sum_{n=0}^\infty 2a_{n}x^{n+1}[/itex]

-- which doesn't quite lead me to the [itex]na_n = 2a_{n-2}[/itex] that Boas ends up with.

I have solved these problems before by expansion and equating coefficients, so I understand these problems conceptually, I'm just not clear on how to manipulate the series notation to yield these more compact results.

Should I be manipulating the indices to match one another, and should I omit x from the expression altogether since it's the coefficients I'm worried about anyway?

Thank you.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by "expanding" each series representation.

If we have [itex]y= \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n[/itex] then
[itex]y'= \sum_{n=1}^\infty n a_nx^{n-1}[/itex]
(Notice this sum starts at n= 1 because when n= 0, "[itex]n a_nx^n= 0[/itex]".

So we have [itex]\sum_{n=1}^\infty n a_nx^{n-1}= \sum_{n=0}^\infty 2a_nx^{n+1}[/itex].

I think that by "expanding" the series you mean writing out the actual terms. No, you don't have to do that- if two such series are equal for all x, then the coefficients, on each side, of the same powers of x. But in order to use that, we need to change the "index" in each sum so that we have the same power of x.

That is, since "n" is "dummy index, in only has meaning inside the sum and is not part of the actual value, we can change the index on each side separately.
On the left, let j= n- 1. Then n= j+ 1, when n= 1, j= 0 so the sum becomes [itex]\sum_{j=0}^\infty (j+ 1)a_{j+ 1}x^j[/itex]
On the right, let j= n+ 1. Then n= j- 1, when n= 0, j= 1 so the sum becomes [itex]\sum_{j= 1}^\infty 2a_{j-1}x^j[/itex].

First, we see that the left hand sum now starts at j= 0 while the left hand sum starts at j= 1. That is, for j= 0, we have [itex](0+1)a_{0+ 1}= a_1= 0[/itex].

For j> 1, we have [itex](j+1)a_{j+1}= 2a_{j-1}[/itex] or [itex]a_{j+1}= \frac{2}{j+1}a_{j-1}[/itex]. For example, if j= 1, that says that [itex]a_2= \frac{2}{2}a_0= a_0[/itex]. If j= 2, [itex]a_{3}= \frac{2}{3}a_1= 0[/itex]. If j= 3, [itex]a_4= \frac{2}{4}a_2= \frac{1}{2}a_2= \frac{1}{2}a_0[/itex], etc. It should be clear that [itex]a_n= 0[/itex] for all odd n while [itex]a_n[/itex] , for every even n, will be a multiple of [itex]a_0[/itex] which is the "undetermined constant" we expect when solving a first order differential equation.

We already have [itex]x_2= a_0[/itex] and [itex]x_4= \frac{1}{2}a_0[/itex]. Now, with n= 5, [itex]a_6= \frac{2}{6}a_4= \frac{1}{3}a_4= \frac{1}{6}a_0[/itex]. With n= 7, [itex]a_8= \frac{2}{8}a_6= \frac{1}{4}a_6= \frac{1}{24}a_0[/itex]. Notice that the denominators are factorials: in fact the denominator for the even index 2n is n!

Now, use "proof by induction", along with the equation [itex]a_{j+1}= \frac{2}{j+ 1} a_j[/itex] to show that [itex]a_{2n}= \frac{1}{n!}a_0[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K