Solving PDEs: Deriving Wave Equation from u(x ± ct)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter KenBakerMN
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pde
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the wave equation from the function u(x ± ct) and understanding the transition between partial differential equations (PDEs). Participants explore the mathematical steps involved in this derivation, including the application of the chain rule and the implications of certain constants in the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to derive ∂²u/∂t² = C²(∂²u/∂g²) from ∂u/∂t = C(∂u/∂g), expressing confusion about the appearance of C².
  • Another participant points out potential typos in the notation, specifically questioning the use of "g" and the number of independent variables.
  • A participant provides a step-by-step approach starting from u(x - ct) and defines g = x - ct, leading to expressions for ∂u/∂x and ∂u/∂t using the chain rule.
  • Concerns are raised about whether the derived equations correctly lead to the wave equation, with emphasis on the need to differentiate further to clarify the presence of c².
  • One participant suggests that the notation may be causing confusion and encourages focusing on the differentiation process to clarify the derivation of the wave equation.
  • A later reply indicates that the confusion was resolved by carrying out the second derivatives correctly and applying the chain rule.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the derivation steps and the role of constants in the equations. There is no consensus on the correct interpretation of the notation or the derivation process, as multiple viewpoints and clarifications are presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of notation, the dependence on the correct application of the chain rule, and unresolved questions about the assumptions underlying the derivation steps.

KenBakerMN
Messages
11
Reaction score
2
It's been a little too long since I've has to do this. Can someone please remind me, how do you get from:

∂u/∂t = C(∂u/∂g)

to

∂^2u/∂t^2 = (C^2)(∂^2u/∂t^2)

The notation here is a little clumsy, but I'm just taking the second PDE of each side. How does the C^2 get there? Seems like it ought to be C but I can't put my finger on a proof either way.

By the way, this comes up in a derivation of the wave equation:

∂^2u/∂x^2 = (1/c^2)(∂^2u/∂t^2)

starting from

u(x,t) = u(x ± ct)

I'm sure someone out there knows this. Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
KenBakerMN said:
It's been a little too long since I've has to do this. Can someone please remind me, how do you get from:

∂u/∂t = C(∂u/∂g)
Typo #1? g?
to

∂^2u/∂t^2 = (C^2)(∂^2u/∂t^2)
Typo # 2? Only one independent variable?

The notation here is a little clumsy, but I'm just taking the second PDE of each side. How does the C^2 get there? Seems like it ought to be C but I can't put my finger on a proof either way.

By the way, this comes up in a derivation of the wave equation:

∂^2u/∂x^2 = (1/c^2)(∂^2u/∂t^2)

starting from

u(x,t) = u(x ± ct)

I'm sure someone out there knows this. Thanks for your help.

So you are trying to show u(x,t) satisfies the wave equation? If so, that should be straightforward. Show us what you have done so far, starting at the beginning.
 
LCKurtz, thanks for the response. Alright, here goes.

Starting from a general function u(x - ct), define g=x - ct. [1]

So we have ∂u/∂x = (∂u/∂g)(∂g/∂x) and ∂u/∂t = (∂u/∂g)(∂g/∂t) . [2]

The PDEs from [1] are: ∂g/∂x = 1, and ∂g/∂t = - c . [3]

So from [2] and [3], ∂u/∂x = ∂u/∂g . [4]

The second PDE from [4] is ∂2u/∂x2 = ∂2u/∂g2, is that correct? [5]

Also from [2] and [3], ∂u/∂t = -c(∂u/∂g) . [6]

Now, to get from [5] and [6] to the wave equation ∂2u/∂x2 = (1/c2)(∂2u/∂t2)
seems to require, from [6], ∂2u/∂t2 = (c2)(∂2u/∂g2)

It's that last step I don't quite get, unless - which is by no means unlikely - I'm making an error someplace else. Seems like the c2 should just be c .

The context here is I'm an electrical engineer trying to understand the physics or ultrasound transmission through a waveguide. This derivation comes from "Basics of Biomedical Ultrasound for Engineers", Axhari, 2010.
 
KenBakerMN said:
LCKurtz, thanks for the response. Alright, here goes.

Starting from a general function u(x - ct), define g=x - ct. [1]

So we have ∂u/∂x = (∂u/∂g)(∂g/∂x) and ∂u/∂t = (∂u/∂g)(∂g/∂t) . [2]
I think the notation is giving you problems. You are trying to show that for any differentiable function ##g##, the function ##u(x,t)=g(x\pm ct)## satisfies the wave equation ##u_{tt}=c^2u_{xx}##. Note that ##g## has a single argument. So when you differentiate both sides of with respect to ##x## you would get ##u_x(x,t) = g'(x\pm ct)\cdot 1##, and when you differentiate both sides with respect to ##t## you get ##u_t(x,t) = g'(x\pm ct)\cdot (\pm c)## with the sign on the ##c## agreeing. What you want to do next is differentiate these two equations again to get ##u_{xx}(x,t)## and ##u_{tt}(x,t)##. Then just look at those two expressions and see if they work. I think you will see where the ##c^2## comes from.
 
Okay, I get it now. I needed to carry out the second PDEs one more step and "chain rule" it. Thanks for your help.
 

Similar threads

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