Solving 2nd order PDE of single variable

nigels
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
I've been getting pretty rusty in terms of derivation in recent years. Encountered this problem which I can't derive the steps despite knowing the solution.

\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial r^2} + \frac{\partial u}{\partial r}\left(\beta + \frac{1}{r}\right)+\frac{\beta}{r}u=0

Known solution:

u(r) = \beta \cdot \exp(-\beta r)

Thank you very much for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since the differential equation has the form of:
(\frac{∂}{∂r})2 u(r) + a(r) \frac{∂}{∂r} u(r) + b(r) u(r) =0​
With a(r) having a simple pole at r=0, and b(r) having no more than a pole of order 2 at r=0, it is sufficient to continue with the Frobenius Method:
u(r) = rσ \sum knrn
You can then substitute this into the equation to get something like:
\sum kn ((n+σ)(n+σ-1)+(n+σ)+(n+σ+1)βr) rn+σ-1 = 0​
This means that the indicial equation becomes:
σ2-σ+σ=0
σ=0, multiplicity 2.​
Using σ=0 the next step is to determine the recursion relationship which will give you kn. This get's one independent solution that you can show is the same as the series for βe-βr.
And then you're done.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
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