Solving Integral Equation with Laplace Transform

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves solving an integral equation using Laplace transforms, specifically focusing on the function defined by an integral that includes an exponential term. The subject area pertains to integral equations and Laplace transform techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the Laplace transform to both sides of the equation and the resulting expressions. There is an exploration of differentiation techniques and the use of the Leibniz rule for differentiating under the integral sign. Some participants question the correctness of the initial Laplace transform calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing hints and corrections regarding the application of the Laplace transform. There is acknowledgment of mistakes in the original poster's calculations, and suggestions for alternative approaches are being explored, including differentiation and the use of specific integral rules.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding notation, particularly the use of convolution versus the integral expression presented. There is also mention of assumptions related to the behavior of functions outside the defined limits of integration.

MisterMan
Messages
47
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



[tex]y(x) = e^{3x} + \int_0^{x}\hspace{1mm}y(t)\hspace{1mm}e^{x-t}\hspace{1mm}dt[/tex]

Homework Equations



[tex](f*g)(x) = \int_0^{x}\hspace{1mm}y(t)\hspace{1mm}g(x-t)\hspace{1mm}dt[/tex]

[tex]L(f*g;s) = L(f;s)L(g;s)[/tex]

I will use [tex]Y(s)[/tex] to denote [tex]L(y;s)[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to solve this like all the other problems I have encountered so far, I took the laplace transform of both sides, giving:

[tex]Y(s) = s-3 + (s-1)Y(s)[/tex]

Which gave me:

[tex]Y(s) = -\frac{s-3}{s-2}[/tex]

However, this doesn't work out, as far as I'm aware there is no inversion for 1 ( I have only dealt with the standard Laplace transforms and can only invert back to them ).

The book I have gives:

[tex]Y(s) = \frac{s-1}{(s-2)(s-3)}[/tex]

But I'm not sure how this was calculated, I'll appreciate any hints and pointing out where I have gone wrong, thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]Y(s) = s-3 + (s-1)Y(s)[/tex]


[tex]Y(s) = \frac{1}{s-3} + \frac{Y(s)}{s-1}[/tex]


You can also differentiate with respect to x to get

[tex]y^{'}(x) = 2 e^{3x} + 2y(x)[/tex]

now take your transform and use

[tex]L(y^{'}) = sY(s) - y(0)[/tex]

and (from the integral equation): [itex]y(o) = 1[/itex]

sam
 
You took the Laplace transform of the exponentials incorrectly. You need the reciprocal of what you have. It should be, for example,

[tex]L[e^{3x}] = \frac{1}{s-3}[/tex]
 
Thanks sam and vela, completely missed that mistake.

Sam, I'm not sure how to use the differentiation approach. Is that starting from:

[tex]y(x) = e^{3x} + \int_0^{x}\hspace{1mm}y(t)\hspace{1mm}e^{x-t}\hspace{1mm}dt[/tex]

And then differentiating both with respect to x? If so, how do I go about differentiating the integral?
 
MisterMan said:
[tex](f*g)(x) = \int_0^{x}\hspace{1mm}y(t)\hspace{1mm}g(x-t)\hspace{1mm}dt[/tex]

[tex]L(f*g;s) = L(f;s)L(g;s)[/tex]

A note on your notation: [itex](f\ast g)(x)[/itex] is typically used to denote a convolution, which is not what you have in the first line of what I've quoted. The integral limits on a convolution run over the entire domain. You then have the property that the Fourier transform of a convolution is the product of the Fourier transforms of the convoluted functions.

Your second line quoted, nevertheless, is correct. I am merely pointing out that most people would assume the first line refers to a convolution, which it really isn't, so be aware of this when you use the (f*g) notation.
 
Mute said:
A note on your notation: [itex](f\ast g)(x)[/itex] is typically used to denote a convolution, which is not what you have in the first line of what I've quoted. The integral limits on a convolution run over the entire domain. You then have the property that the Fourier transform of a convolution is the product of the Fourier transforms of the convoluted functions.
Laplace transforms, unlike Fourier transforms, are traditionally one-sided, so you can take both y(t) and g(t) to vanish for t<0. With that assumption, the convolution integral reduces to the expression MisterMan wrote.
 

Similar threads

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