Solving a Re-arranging Problem: Making r the Subject

  • Thread starter Thread starter lostidentity
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around manipulating the equation \(\frac{dr}{dt} = \Phi - \Psi \frac{2}{r}\frac{dr}{dt}\) to isolate r. The user successfully integrates the equation, resulting in \(r + 2\Psi\ln{r} = \Phi{t} + r_0\), but struggles to make r the subject. A participant suggests that directly isolating r is not feasible unless the left-hand side is defined as a function of r. An alternative solution using the Lambert W function is proposed, yielding \(r = 2 \Psi \text{lambert}\left(\frac{e^{\frac{t\Phi+c}{2 \Psi}}}{2 \Psi}\right)\), which checks out when substituted back into the original ODE. The discussion emphasizes the need for careful verification of the solution.
lostidentity
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I'm trying integrate the following equation and make r the subject
\frac{dr}{dt} = \Phi - \Psi \frac{2}{r}\frac{dr}{dt}

I first collect the derivative terms together and integrate the equation with respect to r and t to obtain

r + 2\Psi\ln{r} = \Phi{t} + r_0

where r0 is the constant of integration. My question is how would I make r the subject of the above equation?

Many thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hi lostidentity! :smile:
lostidentity said:
My question is how would I make r the subject of the above equation?

not possible!

(unless you define the LHS to be f(r), in which case it's r = f-1(RHS) :wink:)
 
I'm wondering if there is another way to solve the ODE I gave in the previous post, i.e.

\left(1+2\frac{\Psi}{r}\right)\frac{dr}{dt} = \Phi
 
Last edited:
lostidentity said:
I'm wondering if there is another way to solve the ODE I gave in the previous post, i.e.

\left(1+2\frac{\Psi}{r}\right)\frac{dr}{dt} = \Phi

Check this very very carefully

r = 2 \Psi lambert\left(\frac{e^{\frac{t\Phi+c}{2 \Psi}}}{2 \Psi}\right)

where c is some constant and where lambert gives the principle solution for w in z=w e^w.

When I substitute this back into the original ODE it seems to check, but do not trust this until you have triple checked it.
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top