Solving Coupled Ingegro-Differential Equations with Maple/Matlab/Mathematica

  • Context: MATLAB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DrJekyll
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupled
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a set of coupled Ingegro-Differential equations using computational tools such as Maple, Matlab, and Mathematica. Participants explore various methods for numerical integration and the conversion of the system into a different form for potential analytical solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a set of coupled Ingegro-Differential equations and expresses uncertainty about the validity of their Fortran 90 implementation, seeking assistance with Maple, Matlab, or Mathematica.
  • Another participant interprets the notation and suggests that the system may only have trivial solutions, indicating a misunderstanding of the notation used.
  • A clarification is made regarding the notation, specifying that b_x represents the x component of b, not a partial derivative.
  • One participant proposes converting the Integro-Differential system into a purely linear PDE system, suggesting a potential for exact symbolic solutions.
  • Another participant shares a similar equation to the proposed PDE and notes that it serves as a constraint equation, expressing difficulty in solving it with Maple or Mathematica.
  • A participant revisits the problem, detailing their approach using Matlab and expressing uncertainty about the results obtained from previous attempts with the pdepe function.
  • The participant outlines their current strategy of using a Runge-Kutta scheme for the first six equations and a separate scheme for the constraint equation, seeking guidance on implementation in Matlab.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the solutions to the equations, with some suggesting trivial solutions while others propose alternative formulations. There is no consensus on the best approach to solve the equations or the validity of the results obtained thus far.

Contextual Notes

Participants note challenges with syntax and functionality in different computational tools, as well as the complexity of the equations involved. There are unresolved issues regarding the integration of the constraint equation and the overall approach to solving the system.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for researchers or students working on coupled differential equations, particularly in the context of numerical methods and computational software applications in physics and engineering.

DrJekyll
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I've got a set of coupled Ingegro-Differential equations that I've been working on for a while. Here they are:

\frac{\partial b_x}{\partial t} = i x b_x + i u_x

\frac{\partial b_y}{\partial t} = i x b_y + i u_y

\frac{\partial b_z}{\partial t} = i x b_z + i u_z - \frac{3}{2 \omega} b_x

\frac{\partial u_x}{\partial t} = i x u_x + i b_x + \frac{2}{\omega} u_x -\frac{3}{2 \omega} \frac{\partial Q}{\partial x}

\frac{\partial u_y}{\partial t} = i x u_y + i b_y - \frac{1}{2 \omega} u_x -i Q

\frac{\partial u_z}{\partial t} = i x u_z + i b_z -\frac{i}{\kappa} Q

where Q is defined as follows:

Q = e^{-K x} \int_x^{\infty} \left( \frac{2 u_y(x')}{3} + \frac{2 i \omega u_x(x')}{9 K} \right) e^{K x'} dx' + e^{K x} \int_{-\infty}^x \left( \frac{2 u_y(x')}{3} - \frac{2 i \omega u_x(x')}{9 K} \right) e^{-K x'} dx'

Here I've included the dependence on x' in the integral to make it clear that the integral depends on ux and uy.

and K = \frac{2}{3} \omega \sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\kappa^2}}

\kappa and \omega are parameters and if need be can be set to 0.0001 and 0.01 respectively.

To date I've written a code in Fortran 90 to solve these equations using a 4rth order Runge-Kutta method along with an adaptive Simpson integration. The code runs and spits out results but I question the validity. Thus, I would like to try and get Maple/Matlab/Mathematica to run through at least one time step to compare too (mainly the result of the integration).

I'm confident that Maple just can't do it, and I'm unsure of the exact syntax to make Mathematica work. As for Matlab, I've been messing around with the pdepe function with an integration call plopped into it but I've had little sucess.

If anyone can help with this it would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


If I understand your notation correctly

u=u(t,x,y,z), b=b(t,x,y,z)

and, e.g.,

u_x=\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}

then your system has only trivial solution

b(t,x,y,z) = _F1(t),u(t,x,y,z) = _F2(t)
 


My notation may be a bit confusing. b_x represents the x component of b not the partial derivative. Also b=b(x,t), the y and z directions can be safely ignored.
 


I believe that it would be better to convert your Integro-Differential system into purely (linear) PDEs system replacing the last condition on Q by the following PDE

-9K\frac{\partial^2 Q}{\partial x^2}+9K^3Q+12K^2u_y-4i\,\omega\frac{\partial u_x}{\partial x}=0

with the boundary conditions Q|_{x=\pm \infty}=0.

I think that there is a chance to solve your system exactly (symbolicaly).
 


I've just recently tried this as well. One difference though,

\frac{\partial^2 Q}{\partial x^2} - K^2 Q = \frac{4 \partial u_y}{3 \partial x} + \frac{4 i \omega u_x}{9}

(without actually checking, they look mostly the same, the above is definitely the correct one, any differences would most likely be my fault in the original post)

It should be noted that the above is a constraint equation.

I still can't get Maple or Mathematica to solve with the constraint equation in. Matlab does produce a result which I'm working on now, resolution might be a problem.
 


Ok, so resurrecting this thread since I'm back to trying to solve using Matab.

Here are the equations I'm trying to solve again, with the last one being a constraint equation. So far I've been using a 4rth order Runge-Kutta scheme to solve the first 6 equations with some initial conditions for 1 time step. Then I've used another RK4 scheme to solve the last equation (after breaking it into 2 first order ODE's) using the values from the previous RK4 step.

\frac{\partial b_x}{\partial t} = i x b_x + i u_x

\frac{\partial b_y}{\partial t} = i x b_y + i u_y

\frac{\partial b_z}{\partial t} = i x b_z + i u_z - \frac{3}{2 \omega} b_x

\frac{\partial u_x}{\partial t} = i x u_x + i b_x + \frac{2}{\omega} u_x -\frac{3}{2 \omega} \frac{\partial Q}{\partial x}

\frac{\partial u_y}{\partial t} = i x u_y + i b_y - \frac{1}{2 \omega} u_x -i Q

\frac{\partial u_z}{\partial t} = i x u_z + i b_z -\frac{i}{\kappa} Q

<br /> \frac{\partial^2 Q}{\partial x^2} - K^2 Q = \frac{4 \partial u_y}{3 \partial x} + \frac{4 i \omega u_x}{9} <br />

with
<br /> K = \frac{2}{3} \omega \sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\kappa^2}} <br />

So, as I said I'm trying to use Matlab to solve this now. Previously I tried using Matlabs pdepe function to solve it and I got a result which I don't believe. Now I would like to use the ODE functions to try and solve it. My guess is that I will need to use something similar to my code to solve it, in that I'll need to solve the first 6 equations for 1 time step, then solve the constraint equation.

The problem is that I have no idea how to do this in Matlab, I have next to no experience with it so any help would be appreciated.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K