Solving an Elliptic PDE Using the Characteristic Equation: A Beginner's Guide

  • Thread starter Thread starter maverick280857
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elliptic pde Pde
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on solving the elliptic PDE y^{2}u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0 by converting it to the characteristic equation y^{2}(\frac{dy}{dx})^{2} + 1 = 0, which reveals that there are no real solutions. Participants clarify that while the characteristic equation lacks real roots, this does not imply that x and y cannot be treated as real variables; rather, it indicates that the characteristic curves do not exist in real space. The method of characteristics is highlighted as a technique to find curves along which the solution propagates, but in this case, these curves lie in the complex plane. The conversation emphasizes the distinction between the absence of real characteristic curves and the physical interpretation of x and y as real coordinates. Understanding these concepts is essential for beginners studying PDEs.
maverick280857
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
5
Hello

In our math course, we encountered the following elliptic PDE:

<br /> y^{2}u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0<br />

In order to solve it, we converted it to the characteristic equation,

<br /> y^{2}\left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^{2} + 1 = 0<br />

Next, we wrote:

\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{i}{y}

My question is: the characteristic equation has no solution in \mathbb{R} but we went ahead and mechanically wrote the expression for dy/dx. Does this mean that we should regard x and y as complex variables? If so, how does one reconcile with the fact that some solution to the PDE as u(x,y) = c is a surface in (x,y,u) space? Perhaps this is a trivial question, but I'm just starting to learn PDEs. Does this also mean that we should not ascribe a physical significance to x and y as coordinates in \mathbb{R}^2?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the fact that it is an elliptic equation tells you that the characteristic equation does not have real roots.
 
Oops yes, of course...I didn't see that.

Also, in such a case, do y and x lose their "physical significance" of being real variables in real space?
 
Mmm..no, it means that the characteristic curve itself doesn't lie in real space.
That's quite a different thing from saying that x and y cannot be regarded as real variables.
 
arildno said:
Mmm..no, it means that the characteristic curve itself doesn't lie in real space.
That's quite a different thing from saying that x and y cannot be regarded as real variables.

Could you please elaborate? And where can I read more about such issues?
 
Well, my memory on characteristics has gone hazy, so it would be helpful if you posted the precise procedure utilized in the particular example.

However, as a general trait, the method of characteristics is a trick whereby we get a family of curves along everyone of which the u-signal propagates in a simple manner (say, by being conserved).

If therefore that family of curves lie in the complex plane, it means that there aren't a set of real curves y(x) along which u propagates. For example, y cannot be solved entirely as a function of x when we constrict ourselves to the real plane.

Please post a few details about the specific procedure.
 
Ok, so the elliptic equation is

au_{xx} + 2bu_{xy} + cu_{yy} = 0

and its characteristic equation is

a\left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^{2} -2b\frac{dy}{dx} + c = 0

Here, b^{2}-ac &lt;0 so it has complex roots, and the characteristic curves are:

\zeta(x,y) = c_{1}
\eta(x,y) = c_{2}
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K