Solve the homogenous Neumann problem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter chwala
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Neumann
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the homogenous Neumann problem and the notation used in differentiation within integrals. Participants clarify the transition from total derivatives to partial derivatives, emphasizing that when multiple variables are involved, the partial derivative notation is appropriate. Specifically, the confusion arises from the notation change from ##\dfrac{d}{dt}## to ##\dfrac{∂}{∂t}##, which is justified as a convention in calculus. The integral representation and its implications on variable independence are also discussed, confirming the correctness of the total derivative approach.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically differentiation and integration.
  • Familiarity with partial derivatives and total derivatives.
  • Knowledge of the homogenous Neumann boundary condition in mathematical analysis.
  • Basic concepts of variable independence in multivariable calculus.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of partial derivatives in multivariable calculus.
  • Learn about the homogenous Neumann problem and its applications in physics and engineering.
  • Explore the Leibniz rule for differentiation under the integral sign.
  • Investigate the implications of variable independence in calculus and its notation conventions.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineering students who are dealing with multivariable calculus, particularly those focused on boundary value problems and integral calculus.

chwala
Gold Member
Messages
2,828
Reaction score
420
TL;DR
See attached
I am going through this notes and i would like some clarity on the highlighted part...the earlier steps are pretty easy to follow...
1663579236438.png


1663579320877.png


Is there a mistake here...did the author mean taking partial derivative with respect to ##t##? is ##\dfrac{d}{dt}## a mistake? How did that change to next line ##\dfrac{∂}{∂t}##... unless i am the one missing something here. Cheers guys.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Its just a notation convention, taking the partial is the same as taking a derivative.

As you move the derivative operation inside the integral, you realize that you now have more than one variable and so switch to the partial derivative notation and that you are not taking the derivative of x ie x is independent of t.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chwala
jedishrfu said:
Its just a notation convention, taking the partial is the same as taking a derivative.

As you move the derivative operation inside the integral, you realize that you now have more than one variable and so switch to the partial derivative notation and that you are not taking the derivative of x ie x is independent of t.
Thanks for that...considering it as a 'notation convention' makes sense. I was lingering there for some time trying to figure out on what's happening man...:biggrin: thanks @jedishrfu. Bingo!
 
chwala said:
Is there a mistake here...did the author mean taking partial derivative with respect to ##t##? is ##\dfrac{d}{dt}## a mistake? How did that change to next line ##\dfrac{∂}{∂t}##... unless i am the one missing something here. Cheers guys.

\int_0^l u(x,t)\,dx is a function only of t, in the same way that \int_a^b f(x)\,dx is just a number: the result of a definite integration is not a function of the dummy variable. So the total derivative is correct. When we swap the order of integation with respect to x and differentiation with respect to t we have by the definitions of total and partial differentiation that <br /> \begin{split}<br /> \frac{d}{dt}\int_0^l u(x,t)\,dt &amp;= <br /> \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{1}{h}\left(\int_0^l u(x,t+h)\,dx - \int_0^l u(x,t)\,dx\right) \\<br /> &amp;= \int_0^l \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{u(x,t+h) - u(x,t)}{h}\,dx \\<br /> &amp;= \int_0^l u_t(x,t)\,dt.\end{split}
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude and chwala

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K