Solution of the f_1(x)-f_1(x-pi)=f_2(x) functional equation

Domdamo
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
We have the equation
f1(x)-f1(x-pi)=f2(x)
where f1, f2 are the unknown and the known functions, respectively.
f1, f2 are periodic functions with period 2pi.

Is it possible to determine the explicit formula of f1?
If yes how should we calculate it?
Relevant Equations
[1]
f1(x)-f1(x-pi)=f2(x)
[2]
f1(x)=f1(x+2pi)
[3]
f2(x)=f2(x+2pi)
Laplace transform of eq. [1]
[4]
F1(p)-exp{-pi*p}*F1(p) = F2(p)
Rearranging eq. [4]
[5]
F1(p) = frac{1}{1-exp{-pi*p}}*F2(p)
Inverse LT of eq. [5]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

You might want to learn a little ##\LaTeX## so that your f1(x)-f1(x-pi)=f2(x) becomes

$$f_1(x)-f_1(x-\pi)=f_2(x)$$ and looks like $$f_1(x)-f_1(x-\pi)=f_2(x)$$
Re:
Domdamo said:
Is it possible to determine the explicit formula of f1?
No. Lots of ##f_1## can be constructed since e.g. ##\sin(\alpha) - \sin(\pi-\alpha) = 0## and ##\sin(n\beta)## is periodical with period ##2\pi## .
So any multiple of any function (periodical with period ##2\pi## ) that has ##f_1(x)-f_1(x-\pi)=0## can be added to a candidate ##f_1##.

[edit]Oops, sign errors...
 
  • Like
Likes Domdamo
Recant: any function with period ##\pi/n## has ##f(x) - f(x-\pi) = 0##.
 
Thank you very much.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top