Show arctan(y/x) satisfies Laplace's equation

In summary, we can show that arctan(y/x) satisfies Laplace's equation by taking its second partial derivatives with respect to x and y, and then summing them to get a result of 0. This can also be proven using the relationship between arctan and logarithmic functions and the properties of analytic functions.
  • #1
alex3
44
0

Homework Statement


Show that arctan(y/x) satisfies Laplace's equation.

Homework Equations


Laplace's equation:
[tex]\frac{\partial^{2}f}{\partial x^{2}}+\frac{\partial^{2}f}{\partial y^{2}}=0[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


We haven't really done this is class too thoroughly, I've looked a http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=second+derivative+of+arctan(y/x)" and it looks pretty messy, and I get the feeling I missing something. I have done partial derivatives, and we've done an exercise in class where we've transformed cartesian to polar co-ords, but I can't see the connection.

Thanks for any help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
alex3 said:

Homework Statement


Show that arctan(x/y) satisfies Laplace's equation.


Homework Equations


Laplace's equation:
[tex]\frac{\partial^{2}f}{\partial x^{2}}+\frac{\partial^{2}f}{\partial y^{2}}=0[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution


We haven't really done this is class too thoroughly, I've looked a http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=second+derivative+of+arctan(y/x)" and it looks pretty messy, and I get the feeling I missing something. I have done partial derivatives, and we've done an exercise in class where we've transformed cartesian to polar co-ords, but I can't see the connection.

Thanks for any help.

It is never messy. Actually its second derivative with respect to x is [tex] -2\,x{y}^{-3} \left( 1+{\frac {{x}^{2}}{{y}^{2}}} \right) ^{-2}[/tex]. So I think you better put all your energy into finding its derivative wrt y. There you'll be left with some addition\subtraction(s) to put an end to this challenge!

AB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
Aha, I've noticed I made a mistake and made a reference to arctan(x/y) rather than arctan(y/x), which is the problem. Does this change things?

Am I right in saying then that I need to find those double partial derivatives and then find the sum (and hope I get zero)? That's 'all' there is to the question?
 
  • #4
alex3 said:
Aha, I've noticed I made a mistake and made a reference to arctan(x/y) rather than arctan(y/x), which is the problem. Does this change things?

Am I right in saying then that I need to find those double partial derivatives and then find the sum (and hope I get zero)? That's 'all' there is to the question?

It makes no difference. In both cases you'll hit the answer 'zero'. That online integrator probably assumes y as a function of x and then this makes the first and second derivatives of f look enormously immense as the derivatives of y wrt x are to be involved as well.

If y is a function of x, I have a really simple solution for that which also applies to this one, too. And you talked about it in your first post... :)
 
Last edited:
  • #5
I'm having problems with the second derivative, I'm using the product rule like so

[tex]
\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \left( \frac{y}{x^{2}} \times \frac{1}{\frac{y^{2}}{x^{2}} + 1}\right)
[/tex]

And getting a pretty nasty result. I don't mean to question the help, but are you sure that's the second derivative?
 
  • #6
alex3 said:
I'm having problems with the second derivative, I'm using the product rule like so

[tex]
\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \left( \frac{y}{x^{2}} \times \frac{1}{\frac{y^{2}}{x^{2}} + 1}\right)
[/tex]

And getting a pretty nasty result. I don't mean to question the help, but are you sure that's the second derivative?

The derivative of arctanu(x) is [tex]u'(x)/(1+u^2)[/tex]. From this rule, you must get for u=x/y, [tex][arctanu(x/y)]'= (1/y)/(1+(x/y)^2)[/tex]. This is totally different from what you have given us and of course yours sounds so cumbersome to go on with and above all else it's incorrect. Taking another derivative of f wrt x simply gives [tex]-(2x/y^2)(1/y)/[1+(x/y)^2]^2[/tex]. So isn't this the same as the one I gave earlier!? Check out your calculations again, but carefully, to find out where you went wrong with differentiation.

Another way to solve this problem is to use the spherical coordinates in place of Cartesian coordinates: Take [tex]\theta=arctan(x/y)[/tex] and then use the the chain rule to replace d/dx and d/dy by [tex]d/d\theta[/tex]. This will make calculations way easier than when you keep going with the traditional method.

AB
 
  • #7
u=y/x, rather than x/y. I know you said this makes no difference, but the differential is different, surely? The first will become

[tex]
-\frac{x^{-2}y}{1+\frac{y^{2}}{x^{2}}}
[/tex]

Won't it? Apologies if I'm being frustrating, I really don't mean to be!
 
  • #8
That's right so far. It looks like it gets messy, but it's really not that bad.

By the way, your second derivative won't match what Altabeh got because you're working on different terms since Altabeh started with arctan(x/y) and you started with arctan(y/x).
 
Last edited:
  • #9
One line proof:

arctan(y/x) = Im[Log(z)] and we know that the real and imaginary parts of analytic functions satisfy the Laplace equation.
 
  • #10
I'm afraid I'm not familiar with analytic functions, I've only very briefly touched on imaginary/complex numbers, and my knowledge of Laplace's equation extends only as far as the form it takes, rather than general rules about its satisfaction.

It certainly looks much nicer than the way I have to do it though! I managed to work it all out in the end mind; thanks to everyone who helped!
 

1. What is Laplace's equation?

Laplace's equation is a second-order partial differential equation that describes the behavior of a scalar field in a region of space, in terms of its rate of change in all directions.

2. How does arctan(y/x) satisfy Laplace's equation?

By taking the second partial derivatives of arctan(y/x) with respect to both x and y, it can be shown that the resulting expression is equal to 0, which satisfies Laplace's equation.

3. What does it mean for a function to satisfy Laplace's equation?

When a function satisfies Laplace's equation, it means that the function is a solution to the equation and therefore describes a scalar field that is in a state of equilibrium, with no sources or sinks.

4. Can Laplace's equation be applied in different fields of science?

Yes, Laplace's equation has applications in various fields of science, such as physics, engineering, and mathematics. It is used to model phenomena such as heat transfer, fluid flow, and electrostatic potential.

5. What are some real-life examples of Laplace's equation at work?

Laplace's equation can be seen in action in many natural and man-made systems, such as the flow of groundwater, the distribution of temperature in a heated object, and the electric potential around a charged sphere. It is also used in image processing and computer graphics.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
694
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
668
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
620
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
608
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
463
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
549
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
789
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
853
Back
Top