Solving Infinite Coupled ODEs to Tackling Complex Systems

  • Thread starter Thread starter dirk_mec1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupled Infinite
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
7 replies · 2K views
dirk_mec1
Messages
755
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement



[tex] \dot{x}_i = \sum_{ n=1}^{\infty} a(n,i) x_n +b(n,i) y_n [/tex][tex] \dot{y}_i = \sum_{ n=1}^{\infty} c(n,i) x_n +d(n,i) y_n [/tex][tex]\forall i \in \mathbb{N}[/tex]

Homework Equations


a,b,c and d are constants (though dependent on the constants n and i).

The Attempt at a Solution


I want to know how I can solve such an infinite large coupled system of ODE's. Can someone help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well, you have multiple unknowns and 2 equations. u need as many equations as you have unknowns. Maybe you can choose i such that you have enough equations to solve?
 
Nick Bruno said:
well, you have multiple unknowns and 2 equations. u need as many equations as you have unknowns. Maybe you can choose i such that you have enough equations to solve?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, i runs from 1 till infinity, in the first post I've denoted that i is part of the natural numbers so

i = 1,2,3,...,inf.
 
He has an infinite number of equations there, Nick.

To the OP: Convert this problem to a set of equations of the form

[tex]\dot u_i = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}e_{n,i} u_n[/tex]

with the following:

[tex]\aligned<br /> u_{2n-1} &= x_n \\<br /> u_{2n} &= y_n \\<br /> e_{2n-1,2m-1} &= a_{n,m} \\<br /> e_{2n-1,2m} &= b_{n,m} \\<br /> e_{2n,2m-1} &= c_{n,m} \\<br /> e_{2n,2m} &= d_{n,m}<br /> \endaligned[/tex]

Now you have a problem in one infinite-dimensioned vector (u) rather than two (x and y). See if you can take it from there.
 
Very smart: creating one infinite dimensional vector but shouldn't there be another summation sign for m?
 
dirk_mec1 said:
but shouldn't there be another summation sign for m?
No.

Suppose that instead of an infinite number of x and y, we only have two:

[tex]\aligned<br /> \dot x_1 &= a_{1,1} x_1 + b_{1,1} y_1 + a_{2,1} x_2 + b_{2,1} y_2 \\<br /> \dot y_1 &= c_{1,1} x_1 + d_{1,1} y_1 + c_{2,1} x_2 + d_{2,1} y_2 \\<br /> \dot x_2 &= a_{1,2} x_1 + b_{1,2} y_1 + a_{2,2} x_2 + b_{2,2} y_2 \\<br /> \dot y_2 &= c_{1,2} x_1 + d_{1,2} y_1 + c_{2,2} x_2 + d_{2,2} y_2<br /> \endaligned[/tex]

Define the four-vector [itex]\vec u = [u_1, u_2, u_3, u_4]^T = [x_1, y_1, x_2, y_2]^T[/itex]. The above becomes

[tex]\aligned<br /> \dot u_1 &= a_{1,1} u_1 + b_{1,1} u_2 + a_{2,1} u_3 + b_{2,1} u_4 \\<br /> \dot u_2 &= c_{1,1} u_1 + d_{1,1} u_2 + c_{2,1} u_3 + d_{2,1} u_4 \\<br /> \dot u_3 &= a_{1,2} u_1 + b_{1,2} u_2 + a_{2,2} u_3 + b_{2,2} u_4 \\<br /> \dot u_4 &= c_{1,2} u_1 + d_{1,2} u_2 + c_{2,2} u_3 + d_{2,2} u_4<br /> \endaligned[/tex]

This is just a matrix-vector equation: [itex]\dot{\vec u} = \mathbf A \vec u[/itex] if you treat u as a column vector (or [itex]\dot{\vec u} = vec u \mathbf A^T[/itex] if you use row vectors). Each of those a, b, c, and d elements maps to exactly one of the elements of the state matrix A.

This won't change when you go to infinite dimensional space.
 
D_H, thanks for clarifying that. Now with this mapping the equation we've got is:

[tex] \dot{ u} = \mathbf A u[/tex]Normally I would determine eigenvalues and eigenvectors to get an explicit solution because the general solution is:

[tex]u(t) = e^{At}[/tex]But now I've got an infinite large matrix. I've thought about this and there's isn't an exact solution that can be found, right?