Solving Laplace's Equation: Problem With Boundary Conditions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Logarythmic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laplace's equation
Logarythmic
Messages
277
Reaction score
0
I have a problem solving

\nabla^2 T(x,y,z) = 0
T(0,y,z)=T(a,y,z)=0
T(x,0,z)=T(x,b,z)=T_0 \sin{\frac{\pi x}{a}
T(x,y,0)=T(x,y,c)=const.

I use separation of variables and get

X_n (x) = \sin{\frac{n \pi x}{a}
Y_n (y) = \cosh{\sqrt{\frac{n^2 \pi^2}{c^2} + \frac{n^2 \pi^2}{a^2}}y} + \sinh{\sqrt{\frac{n^2 \pi^2}{c^2} + \frac{n^2 \pi^2}{a^2}}y}
Z_n (z) = \cos{\frac{n \pi z}{c}
T(x,y,z) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n X_n (x) Y_n (y) Z_n (z)

where I have used the boundary conditions for x and z. Is this correct?
If it is, I'm having problems to wrap this up. I suppose I can use the condition for T(x,0,z) to get the constants. My calculations gives me

a_n = \frac{T_0}{\cos{\frac{\pi z}{c}}}

but then I can't get it toghether with the condition for T(x,b,z)...
Any ideas?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, first of all, the "y" part of the solution must be periodic, but I'm afraid sinh & cosh are not...The same with the "z" & "x" part.

Daniel.
 
So the X- and the Z-part are correct, but not the Y-part?
 
That is easiest to do as 4 separate problems, each having 5 sides grounded.
Then add the 4 solutions.
 
Sorry, I do not understand.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top