Solution of differential equation
- Context: Undergrad
- Thread starter ssky
- Start date
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around solving a differential equation, specifically focusing on the methods for finding the characteristic equation and general solutions for linear, homogeneous differential equations with constant coefficients. Participants explore different forms of solutions, including those involving trigonometric and hyperbolic functions, and discuss boundary conditions relevant to the problem.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Mathematical reasoning
- Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- Some participants discuss the process of deriving the characteristic equation for a second-order differential equation and its implications for the general solution.
- Others explain the conversion from complex exponentials to sine and cosine functions, emphasizing the relationship defined by Euler's formula.
- A participant raises a question about normalization of functions and the conditions required for a function to be normalized over a specified interval.
- There is a discussion about the differences in solutions when dealing with second versus fourth-order differential equations, particularly regarding the roots of the characteristic equations.
- Some participants express confusion about whether to express solutions in terms of exponential functions or hyperbolic functions, with differing opinions on the appropriateness of each form.
- A later reply provides a method for solving for constants in the general solution, but acknowledges the complexity of the resulting equations.
- Participants share their struggles with solving the equations and express a need for further clarification on specific steps and boundary conditions.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to express solutions, as some advocate for using hyperbolic functions while others prefer exponential forms. Additionally, there is ongoing uncertainty regarding the normalization process and the specific boundary conditions applicable to the problem.
Contextual Notes
Participants note that the problem involves complex roots and boundary conditions that may lead to trivial solutions, but the implications of these conditions are not fully resolved. There is also mention of the difficulty in solving for constants due to the complexity of the equations involved.
- 42,895
- 983
For this differential equation, the characteristic equation is [itex]r^2= -\lambda_i[/itex] and has characteristic roots [itex]r= \pm\lambda_i i[/itex] (that second "i" is the imaginary unit). That, in turn means that the general solution to the differential equation is [itex]\psi_i(x)= Ae^{i\lambda_i x}+ Ce^{-i\lambda_i x}= Ccos(\lambda_i x)+ D sin(\lambda_i x)[/itex] where A, B, C, and D are constants. Do you understand how to convert from the complex exponential to sine and cosine? It is based on [itex]e^{ix}= cos(x)+ i sin(x)[/itex].
Now look at the boundary conditions. From [itex]\psi_i(x)= Ccos(\lambda_i x)+ Dsin(\lambda_i x)[/itex], we have [itex]d\psi_i/dx= -C\lambda_i sin(\lambda_i x)+ D\lambda_i cos(\lambda_i x)[/itex] so [itex]d\psi_i/dx(0)= D\lambda_i = 0[/itex].
If [itex]\lambda_i= 0[/itex] the differential equation would be just [itex]d^2\psi_i/dx= 0[/itex] which has general solution [itex]\psi_i(x)= Ax+ B[/itex] (just integrate twice) and then [itex]d\psi/dx= A= 0[/itex] in order to satisfy [itex]d\psi/dx(0)= 0[/itex]. Then \psi_i(1)= B= 0[/itex] from the other boundary condition. That gives [itex]\psi_i(x)[/itex] identically 0. That is a solution but not a very interesting or useful one! That is called the "trivial" solution. If [itex]\lambda_i\ne 0[/itex], we must have D= 0 so that [itex]\psi_i(x)= C cos(\lambda_i x)[/itex].
Now [itex]\psi_i(1)= C cos(\lambda_i)= 0[/itex]. That is satisfied by C= 0- but again, that would mean, with both C and D equal to 0, that [itex]\psi_i(x)[/itex] is identically 0. In order to have a "non trivial" solution, we must have [itex]cos(\lambda_i)= 0[/itex]. cos(x)= 0 for x an "odd multiple of [itex]\pi/2[/itex]": [itex]\pi/2[/itex], [itex]3\pi/2[/itex], etc. That means we must have [itex]\lambda_i= (2i- 1)\pi/2[/itex]. That is the reason for the subscript "i" on the functions. We now have [itex]\psi(x)= Ccos(((2i-1)\pi/2)x)[/itex].
The intial [itex]\sqrt{2}[/itex] is the "normalizing" part. That makes the integral of the square of the function, from 0 to 1, equal to 1.
- 29
- 0
thank you very very very ... very much.
but, i don't understand :shy: the last part
can you help me pleas
The intial is the "normalizing" part. That makes the integral of the square of the function, from 0 to 1, equal to 1
- 1,495
- 5
- 1,495
- 5
HallsofIvy said:For this differential equation, the characteristic equation is [itex]r^2= -\lambda_i[/itex] and has characteristic roots [itex]r= \pm\lambda_i i[/itex] (that second "i" is the imaginary unit). That, in turn means that the general solution to the differential equation is [itex]\psi_i(x)= Ae^{i\lambda_i x}+ Ce^{-i\lambda_i x}= Ccos(\lambda_i x)+ D sin(\lambda_i x)[/itex] where A, B, C, and D are constants. Do you understand how to convert from the complex exponential to sine and cosine? It is based on [itex]e^{ix}= cos(x)+ i sin(x)[/itex].
The difference between the previous differential equation and this one is that the first one had a second derivative in it and this one a fourth derivative. So the characteristic equation changes from [itex]r^2=-\lambda_i^2[/itex] to [itex]r^4=\mu_i^4[/itex]. This has the solutions [itex]r=\{-\mu_i,\mu_i,-i \mu_i, i\mu_i \}[/itex] as a result the general solution will become [itex]\psi(x)=A e^{-\mu x}+B e^{\mu x}+C e^{- i \mu x}+D e^{i \mu x}[/itex]. The exponents with i in their powers can be written as cosine and sine again and the real exponents can be written as cosh and sinh.
- 42,895
- 983
The first was [itex]d^2\psi/dx^2= -\lambda_i^2 \psi[/itex] which has characteristic equation [itex]r^2= -\lambda_i^2[/itex] with roots [itex]\pm i\lambda_i[/itex] while the second was [itex]d^4\psi/dx^4= /mu^4\psi[/itex] which has characteristic equation [itex]r^4= \mu^4[/itex]. We can solve that by first taking the square root: [itex]r^2= \pm \mu^2[/itex]. Taking the positive root, [itex]r^2= \mu^2[/itex], and taking the square root again gives [itex]r= \pm \mu[/itex] while taking the negative root, [itex]r^2= -\mu^2[/itex] and taking the square root gives [itex]r= \pm i\mu[/itex]. The four roots of the equation are [itex]\mu[/itex], [itex]-\mu[/itex], [itex]i\mu[/itex], and [itex]-i\mu[/itex].
The imaginary roots, [itex]i\mu[/itex] and [itex]-i\mu[/itex], give [itex]sin(\mu x)[/itex] and [itex]cos(\mu x)[/itex] solutions as before. The solutions corresponding to the real roots, [itex]\mu[/itex], and [itex]-\mu[/itex], can be written [itex]e^{\mu x}[/itex] and [itex]e^{-\mu x}[/itex], but because
[tex]cosh(\mu x)= \frac{e^{\mu x}+ e^{-\mu x}}{2}[/tex]
and
[tex]sinh(\mu x)= \frac{e^{\mu x}- e^{-\mu x}}{2}[/tex]
they can be written in terms of sinh and cosh also. Since cosh(0)= 1 and sinh(0)= 0, those functions are better suited for initial value problems where we are given values of the function and its derivative at x= 0.
- 29
- 0
... but if we write in the solution [itex]e^{\mu x}[/itex] and [itex]e^{-\mu x}[/itex] is it right ? or we have to write cosh and sinh in the solution - 1,495
- 5
- 29
- 0
- 1,495
- 5
- 1,495
- 5
- 29
- 0
Cyosis said:That is all correct so far. You can now solve equation (5) for C3 and then plug it into solve for C4. After that you can solve C1 and C2. It doesn't look like it's going to be pretty though, I'll have a look at it later to see if you can simplify it.
thank you but I do not understand what you mean.
- 1,495
- 5
[tex] \begin{align}<br /> & -C_3 \cosh \mu_i-C_4 \sinh \mu_i+C_3 \cos \mu_i+C_4 \sin \mu_i=0<br /> \\<br /> & -C_3 \sinh \mu_i-C_4 \cosh \mu_i - C_3 \sin \mu_i+C_4 \cos \mu_i=0<br /> \end{align}[/tex]
Solving equation (1) for C3 yields:
[tex] C_3=-C_4 \frac{\sin \mu_i -\sinh \mu_i}{\cos \mu_i-\cosh \mu_i}[/tex]
Plug this value for C3 into equation (2) and solve for C4.
Edit: This is a pretty weird problem, because the only function that seems to meet all requirements is 0.
- 29
- 0
- 42,895
- 983
- 29
- 0
- 42,895
- 983
[tex]\psi(x)= C_1cosh(\mu x)+ C_2sinh(\mu x)+ C_3cos(\mu x)+ C_4sin(\mu x)[/tex]
so
[tex]\psi'(x)= \mu C_1sinh(\mu x)+ \mu C_2 cosh(\mu x)- \mu C_3sin(\mu x)+ \mu C_4cos(\mu x)[/tex]
and the conditions are
[tex]\psi(0)= d\psi(0)/dx= 0[/tex]
[tex]\psi(1)= d\psi(1)/dx= 0[/tex]
[tex]\psi(0)= C_1+ C_3= 0[/tex]
so
[tex]C_3= -C_1[/tex]
[tex]\psi'(0)= \mu C_2+ \mu C_4= 0[/tex]
so
[tex]C_4= -C_2[/tex].
That tells us that we can write
[tex]\psi(x)= C_1cosh(\mu x)+ C_2sinh(\mu x)- C_1cos(\mu x)+ C_2sin(\mu x)[/tex]
Now we use
[tex]\psi(1)= C_1cosh(\mu)+ C_2sinh(\mu)- C_1cos(\mu)+ C_2sin(\mu)= 0[/tex]
and
[tex]\psi'(1)= \mu C_1sinh(\mu)+ \mu C_2 cosh(\mu)+ \mu C_1sin(\mu)- \mu C_2cos(\mu)= 0[/tex]
We can write those as
[tex]C_1(cosh(\mu)- cos(\mu))+ C_2(sinh(\mu)- sin(\mu))= 0[/tex]
and
[tex]C_1(sinh(\mu)+ sin(\mu)+ C_2(cosh(\mu)- cos(\mu))= 0[/tex]
In order to solve for, say, [itex]C_1[/itex], we would have to eliminate [itex]C_2[/itex].
We could do that by multiplying the first equation by [itex]cosh(\mu)- cos(\mu)[/itex], the second equation by [itex]sinh(\mu)- sin(\mu)[/itex], and subtracting the second from the first.
That gives
[tex](cosh(\mu)- cos(\mu))(cosh(\mu)- cos(\mu))C_1- (sinh(\mu)- sin(\mu))(sinh(\mu)+ sin(\mu)C_1= 0[/tex]
[tex]C_1(cosh^2(\mu)- 2sinh(\mu)sin(\mu)+ cos^2(\mu)- sinh^2(\mu)+ sin^2(\mu))= 0[/tex].
But [itex]cosh^2(\mu)- sinh^2(\mu)= 1[/itex] and [itex]cos^2(\mu)+ sin^2(\mu)= 1[/itex] so this becomes
[tex](2- 2cosh(\mu)cos(\mu))C_1= 0[/tex]
Now, one obvious solution is [itex]C_1= 0[/itex] but that leads to [itex]C_2= 0[/itex] also which means [itex]\psi(x)[/itex] is identically 0- the "trivial" solution. In order to have a "non-trivial" solution, we must have [itex]C_1\ne 0[/itex] which means we must have the coefficient
[tex]2- 2cosh^2(\mu)cos(\mu)= 0[/tex]
which leads immediately to [itex]2cosh(\mu)cos(\mu)= 2[/itex] or
[tex]cosh(\mu)cos(\mu)= 1[/itex].[/tex]
- 29
- 0
if [itex]C_1\ne 0[/itex]
then how we find [itex]C_1[/itex] ?
- 42,895
- 983
We don't. If [itex]cosh(\mu)cos(\mu)= 1[/itex], so there are non-trivial solutions, there will be an infinite number of such non-trivial functions.ssky said:thanks a lot,
if [itex]C_1\ne 0[/itex]
then how we find [itex]C_1[/itex] ?
Basically, you are solving an "eigenvalue" problem. If there exist non-trivial solutions to the equation [itex]Av= \mu v[/itex] for A a linear operator, then [itex]\mu[/itex] is an "eigenvalue" of A and it can be shown that the set of all eigenvectors (values of v) satisfying that equation for that particular value of [itex]\mu[/itex] form a "subspace" of all possible solutions and so there are necessarily an infinite number of them.
- 29
- 0
- 42,895
- 983
[/URL]ssky said:thank you very much... I would like to give you this gift for helping me
http://blog.doctissimo.fr/php/blog/un_avenir_heureux/images/bouquet%20de%20fleur.gif
Very nice! Thank you!
- 13
- 0
(YY)xY''=C (C:Real nnumber)
- 42,895
- 983
Click on the "new topic" button to start a new thread.
In fact, I am going to do that for you and name it "gerechte23's question"!
Similar threads
- · Replies 24 ·
- Replies
- 24
- Views
- 2K
- · Replies 3 ·
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 2K
- · Replies 52 ·
- Replies
- 52
- Views
- 9K
- · Replies 3 ·
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 3K
- · Replies 2 ·
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 3K
- · Replies 0 ·
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 3K
- · Replies 3 ·
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 2K
- · Replies 6 ·
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 2K
- · Replies 3 ·
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 3K
- · Replies 5 ·
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 4K