Solving PDE by using Laplace Transform

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a partial differential equation (PDE) using the Laplace transform. Participants explore the application of the Laplace transform to the given PDE, the implications of initial and boundary conditions, and the process of finding constants and the inverse transform.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the PDE and expresses confusion about applying the Laplace transform to the initial condition $u(x,0)$. They note their professor's comment on this issue.
  • Another participant suggests that applying the transform to $u(x,0)$ wouldn't gain anything due to the lack of $t$ dependence in the equation.
  • Participants discuss the need to solve the resulting equations for constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ after obtaining a general solution from the transformed PDE.
  • One participant mentions potential issues when evaluating $u(x,s)$ at $s=0$ and expresses concern about the third term in the solution.
  • Another participant clarifies that the Initial Value Theorem (IVT) should be applied as a condition and not by taking the limit as $s \to 0$, but rather as $s \to \infty$.
  • A later reply corrects the notation of a boundary condition, suggesting it should be expressed differently for clarity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the steps to solve the PDE using the Laplace transform, but there are differing views on the application of the initial condition and the use of the Initial Value Theorem. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to handle the initial condition in the context of the Laplace transform.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the initial condition and the implications of applying the Laplace transform. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the correct application of the Initial Value Theorem and the handling of boundary conditions.

Markov2
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Given

$\begin{aligned} & {{u}_{t}}={{u}_{xx}},\text{ }x>0,\text{ }t>0 \\
& u(x,0)={{u}_{0}}, \\
& {{u}_{x}}(0,t)=u(0,t).
\end{aligned}
$

I need to apply the Laplace transform to solve it. I'll denote $u(x,s)=\mathcal L(u(x,\cdot))(s),$ so for the first line I have $s\cdot u(x,s)-u(x,0)=\dfrac{\partial^2 u(x,s)}{\partial x^2},$ now here's my problem, when I did this problem my professor told me I can't apply the transform to the condition $u(x,0)$ why? Well after this for the third line I have $\dfrac{\partial u(x,s)}{\partial x}-u(0,s)=0$ (1). So we have to solve $\dfrac{{{\partial }^{2}}u(x,s)}{\partial {{x}^{2}}}-s\cdot u(x,s)=-{{u}_{0}}$ which gives a a solution $u(x,s)=c_1e^{-\sqrt sx}+c_2e^{\sqrt sx}+\dfrac{u_0}s$ (2).

Now do I need to use (2) and (1) to find the constants? And after that I need to find the inverse Laplace transform, so far, is it correct?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Markov said:
Given

$\begin{aligned} & {{u}_{t}}={{u}_{xx}},\text{ }x>0,\text{ }t>0 \\
& u(x,0)={{u}_{0}}, \\
& {{u}_{x}}(0,t)=u(0,t).
\end{aligned}
$

I need to apply the Laplace transform to solve it. I'll denote $u(x,s)=\mathcal L(u(x,\cdot))(s),$ so for the first line I have $s\cdot u(x,s)-u(x,0)=\dfrac{\partial^2 u(x,s)}{\partial x^2},$ now here's my problem, when I did this problem my professor told me I can't apply the transform to the condition $u(x,0)$ why?

You could, actually, but it wouldn't gain you anything. There's no $t$ dependence in that equation anywhere.

Well after this for the third line I have $\dfrac{\partial u(x,s)}{\partial x}-u(0,s)=0$ (1). So we have to solve $\dfrac{{{\partial }^{2}}u(x,s)}{\partial {{x}^{2}}}-s\cdot u(x,s)=-{{u}_{0}}$ which gives a a solution $u(x,s)=c_1e^{-\sqrt sx}+c_2e^{\sqrt sx}+\dfrac{u_0}s$ (2).

Now do I need to use (2) and (1) to find the constants? And after that I need to find the inverse Laplace transform, so far, is it correct?
Thanks!

You can always plug solutions into the DE to verify that they are correct. I would say they are, and yes, you need to do the inverse LT to find the final solution.
 
Okay but, do I need to find the inverse now for (2) and that's all?
 
Use the Initial Value Theorem on $u(x,0)=u_{0}$, and (2), to obtain $c_{1}$ and $c_{2}$. Then take the Inverse LT, and you're done.
 
If I use $u(x,s)$ at $s=0,$ then (2) will give me problems with the third term. :(
 
Markov said:
If I use $u(x,s)$ at $s=0,$ then (2) will give me problems with the third term. :(

But when you use the IVT, you're not taking the limit as $s\to 0$, but as $s\to\infty$. The word initial refers to the time domain, not the frequency domain. Also keep in mind that you're imposing the IVT as a condition. Incidentally, your (1) really ought to be

$$\frac{\partial u(x,s)}{\partial x}\Bigg|_{x=0}=u(0,s).$$
 
Oh yes, that now makes sense!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K