Solve PDE: Find General Solution

  • Thread starter Thread starter geoffrey159
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pde
geoffrey159
Messages
535
Reaction score
72

Homework Statement



Consider the following pde: ##\sum_{i=1}^n c_i f_{x_i} = 0##,

where all the ##c_i## are real valued and ##c_1 \neq 0##, and ##f## is the unknown defined from ##\mathbb{R}^n\to \mathbb{R}## and of class ##{\cal C}^1(\mathbb{R}^n,\mathbb{R})##

Show there exists an invertible ##n\times n## real matrix ##M## such that such that the change of variable ## X = M x## simplifies the pde to ##F_{X_1} = 0##, where ##F(X) = f(x)##. Then what is the general solution to this pde.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Assuming there exists such a solution, and such a matrix. Then the change of variable is of class ##{\cal C}^1(\mathbb{R}^n,\mathbb{R}^n)##, bijective, and its inverse has same regularity. So ##F## has the same regularity as ##f## and its partial derivatives are defined. Wa have:

## 0 = \sum_{i=1}^n c_i f_{x_i}(x) = \sum_{i=1}^n c_i (\sum_{k=1}^n \frac{\partial X_k}{\partial x_i} F_{X_k}(X)) = \sum_{i=1}^n c_i (\sum_{k=1}^n m_{ki} F_{X_k}(X)) = \sum_{k=1}^n (\sum_{i=1}^n c_i m_{ki}) F_{X_k}(X) ##

So we must choose ##M## such that ## M_{1,\bullet} \ \vec c =1## and ##M_{k,\bullet}\ \vec c = 0## for ##k\neq 1##. So we can choose

##M = \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{c_1} & 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
\frac{-c_2}{c_1} & 1 & 0 & \vdots \\
\vdots &0 & \ddots & \ldots \\
\frac{-c_n}{c_1} & \ldots & \ldots & 1
\end{pmatrix} ##

It's determinant is ##\frac{1}{c_1}\neq 0 ## so ##M## is invertible and with such a matrix, ##F_{X_1} = 0##.

The solutions to this pde have the form ## F(X) = \lambda(X_2,...,X_n) ##, where ##\lambda \in {\cal C}^1(\mathbb{R}^ {n-1},\mathbb{R})##, so returning to ##f##, then

##f(x) = \lambda(M_{2,\bullet}\ x,...,M_{n,\bullet}\ x) = \lambda( x_2 - \frac{c_2}{c_1} x_1 , ..., x_n - \frac{c_n}{c_1} x_1)##

Are you ok with that proof?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nobody?

I checked the math and it looks correct. A second opinion would be appreciated though.
 
  • Like
Likes geoffrey159
Thank you Samy for looking at it.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top