Solving series with complex exponentials.

In summary: Oh, I see what you mean. The first part is still 1, and the other is 2. Oh, I see what you mean. The first part is still 1, and the other is 2. Yes, that's right. And then you can factor -1 out from the second and third terms and you'll get the desired result.In summary, the given equation can be simplified using the result for geometric series to obtain the final solution of (a^2-r^2)/(a^2-2atcos(theta-phi)+r^2). The steps involved in the simplification include expanding the series, factoring out common terms, and using the fact that r<=a and |e^{
  • #1
yungman
5,718
241

Homework Statement


I don't know how to come up with this final solution:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=\frac{a^2-r^2}{a^2-2at\cos(\theta-\phi)+r^2}[/tex]

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


For [itex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}[/itex], multiply by [itex]\frac{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}(a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)})[/tex]
[tex]=\frac{ar^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}+\frac{ar^{n-1} e^{j(n-1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}-\frac{r^{n}e^{j(n(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot\cdot \cdot+\frac{are^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a}-\frac{r^2e^{j2(\theta-\phi)}}{a}[/tex]
[tex]=re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}[/tex]
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

The same steps are use:
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]I expand the series out. You can see most cancel each other and leaving only two terms which factored out into 4 simpler terms. You can see two of the terms match the answer:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}} +\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

Compare with [itex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\Rightarrow\;\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=0[/tex]

I have no idea how to make this zero, please help.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I can't follow at all what you have done, so I can't comment on it.

Perhaps the best approach would be to use the commonly known result for geometric series: [tex] \sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n = \frac{1}{1-x} [/tex] for [itex] |x| < 1 [/itex]
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
clamtrox said:
I can't follow at all what you have done, so I can't comment on it.

Perhaps the best approach would be to use the commonly known result for geometric series: [tex] \sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n = \frac{1}{1-x} [/tex] for [itex] |x| < 1 [/itex]

Thanks for the reply.
It is given [itex]r\leq a[/itex] and also [itex]|e^{j(\theta-\phi)}|\leq 1[/itex]. So that fits [itex]|x|\leq 1[/itex]

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;\frac{1}{1-x}=\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]


The same steps are use:
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{-j(\theta-\phi)} \;\Rightarrow\;\frac{1}{1-x}=\frac{a}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

But that will give:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{a}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

That's does not give the right answer. Please help.
 
  • #4
yungman said:
Thanks for the reply.
It is given [itex]r\leq a[/itex] and also [itex]|e^{j(\theta-\phi)}|\leq 1[/itex]. So that fits [itex]|x|\leq 1[/itex]

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;\frac{1}{1-x}=\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

Notice that the summation in clamtrox' post starts at ##0## and yours starts at ##1##.
 
  • #5
R136a1 said:
Notice that the summation in clamtrox' post starts at ##0## and yours starts at ##1##.

Thanks, I missed that. I have to see whether it's making any difference.
 
  • #6
So with the extra term of [itex]n=0[/itex], both will give a 1 for [itex]n=0[/itex].

[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{a}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}+2[/tex]

I then factor 1 into one of the fraction:

[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{a}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}+2=1+\frac{2a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{2a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

I still cannot get the right answer.
 
  • #7
yungman said:
So with the extra term of [itex]n=0[/itex], both will give a 1 for [itex]n=0[/itex].

[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{a}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}+2[/tex]

Don't you think that should be -2 instead of +2?

You can then give -1 to each of the fraction to get the right answer.
 
  • #8
Pranav-Arora said:
Don't you think that should be -2 instead of +2?

You can then give -1 to each of the fraction to get the right answer.

Can you explain how you can make it to -1. If you look at post #3, it's all positive result. n=0 then the result is +1. I don't understand why you can assign -1 to it. Please help.

Thanks
 
  • #9
yungman said:
Can you explain how you can make it to -1. If you look at post #3, it's all positive result. n=0 then the result is +1. I don't understand why you can assign -1 to it. Please help.

Thanks

You agree that
$$\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} x^i=\frac{1}{1-x}$$

for ##|x| < 1##.

The above series is:
$$1+x+x^2+x^3+...=\frac{1}{1-x}$$
Subtract 1 from both the sides to get
$$\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} x^i =\frac{1}{1-x}-1$$

Do you agree and does this clear your doubt?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #10
yungman said:
Thanks, I missed that. I have to see whether it's making any difference.

[tex] \sum_{n=1}^\infty x^n = x \sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n [/tex]
 
  • #11
[tex] \sum_{k=m}^\infty ar^k=\frac{ar^m}{1-r} [/tex]

Here is the more general formula, it should be easier to go from here.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #12
Pranav-Arora said:
You agree that
$$\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} x^i=\frac{1}{1-x}$$

for ##|x| \leqslant 1##.

The above series is:
$$1+x+x^2+x^3+...=\frac{1}{1-x}$$
Subtract 1 from both the sides to get
$$\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} x^i =\frac{1}{1-x}-1$$

Do you agree and does this clear your doubt?

Yes, I made a mistake, it's -1 instead.

The book suggested the method in my original post and I just don't see how that work!
 
  • #13
montadhar said:
[tex] \sum_{k=m}^\infty ar^k=\frac{ar^m}{1-r} [/tex]

Here is the more general formula, it should be easier to go from here.

Do you have a link that explain a little more on this? What is the limit of [itex]r[/itex] in this?
 
  • #15
Pranav-Arora said:

Thanks for your help. Lastly I just want to verify this:

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}[/tex]

It is given ##r\leq a## so ##\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n\leq 1##

[tex]|e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}|=e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow\;|x|=\left|\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}\right|\leq 1[/tex]
Thanks
 
  • #16
Pranav-Arora said:

I just read through the article. I don't think this can work for my problem. As posted, the ##r\leq 1## in my case. This does not work for ##r=1## as the denominator become zero and the solution is unbounded.

So I have to go back to my original post #1. Maybe that's the reason the book used a complicated formula.

Please help.

Thanks
 
  • #17
yungman said:
I just read through the article. I don't think this can work for my problem. As posted, the ##r\leq 1## in my case. This does not work for ##r=1## as the denominator become zero and the solution is unbounded.

So I have to go back to my original post #1. Maybe that's the reason the book used a complicated formula.

Please help.

Thanks

You are right, and that is also the reason I edited my previous post.

Can you perhaps post the complete problem statement? I don't see the bounds stated anywhere in the OP.
 
  • #18
This is part of the derivation of Laplace equation on a disk. The books show these three steps. I am trying to verify this by deriving from beginning to the end. The important thing is the boundary of the disk is ##r=a##. So the solution has to be finite when ##r=a## which rules out the easy solution of the few suggestions above.

It is given by the book:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=\frac{a^2-r^2}{a^2-2at\cos(\theta-\phi)+r^2}[/tex]


This is my attempt:
For [itex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}[/itex], multiply by [itex]\frac{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}(a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)})[/tex]

[tex]=\frac{r^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}+\frac{r^{n-1} e^{j(n-1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-2}}+\frac{r^{n-2} e^{j(n-2)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-3}}\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot\cdot \cdot+\frac{r^2e^{j2(\theta-\phi)}}{a}+re^{j(\theta-\phi)}[/tex]

[tex]-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}-\frac{r^{n}e^{j(n(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}-\frac{r^{n-1}e^{j(n-1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-2}}\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot\cdot \cdot-\frac{r^3e^{-j3(\theta-\phi)}}{a^2}-\frac{r^2e^{j2(\theta-\phi)}}{a}[/tex]
As you can see, all except two terms get canceled out giving:
[tex]=re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}[/tex]
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

The same steps are use:
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]


I expand the series out. You can see most cancel each other and leaving only two terms which factored out into 4 simpler terms. You can see two of the terms match the answer:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}} +\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

Compare with [itex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\Rightarrow\;\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=0[/tex]

I have no idea how to make this zero, please help.
 
Last edited:
  • #19
yungman said:
This is part of the derivation of Laplace equation on a disk. The books show these three steps. I am trying to verify this by deriving from beginning to the end.

It is given by the book:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=\frac{a^2-r^2}{a^2-2at\cos(\theta-\phi)+r^2}[/tex]


This is my attempt:
For [itex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}[/itex], multiply by [itex]\frac{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}(a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)})[/tex]

[tex]=\frac{r^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}+\frac{r^{n-1} e^{j(n-1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-2}}+\frac{r^{n-2} e^{j(n-2)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-3}}\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot\cdot \cdot+\frac{r^2e^{j2(\theta-\phi)}}{a}+re^{j(\theta-\phi)}[/tex]

[tex]-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}-\frac{r^{n}e^{j(n(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-1}}-\frac{r^{n-1}e^{j(n-1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^{n-2}}\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot\cdot \cdot-\frac{r^3e^{-j3(\theta-\phi)}}{a^2}-\frac{r^2e^{j2(\theta-\phi)}}{a}[/tex]
As you can see, all except two terms get canceled out giving:
[tex]=re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}[/tex]
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

The same steps are use:
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}-\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]


I expand the series out. You can see most cancel each other and leaving only two terms which factored out into 4 simpler terms. You can see two of the terms match the answer:
[tex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}} +\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}-\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

Compare with [itex]1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}=1+\frac{re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}{a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}[/itex]

[tex]\Rightarrow\;\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=0[/tex]

I have no idea how to make this zero, please help.

I cannot figure out what you are trying to do, but it does seem you are making the problem 100 times more difficult than it is. You want to evaluate
[tex] 1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}
= 1 + 2\, \text{Re}\left[ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)} \right] [/tex]
The summation can be easily computed using
[tex] \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} x^n = \frac{x}{1-x}, \;\; x = (r/a)\, e^{j(\theta-\phi)}. [/tex]
 
  • #20
Ray Vickson said:
I cannot figure out what you are trying to do, but it does seem you are making the problem 100 times more difficult than it is. You want to evaluate
[tex] 1+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{-jn(\theta-\phi)}
= 1 + 2\, \text{Re}\left[ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)} \right] [/tex]
The summation can be easily computed using
[tex] \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} x^n = \frac{x}{1-x}, \;\; x = (r/a)\, e^{j(\theta-\phi)}. [/tex]

Yes, you are correct, but this formula cannot accommodate when ##r=a##. This is a Laplace equation on a disk where boundary condition is ##r=a##. So this formula cannot be used.
 
  • #21
yungman said:
Yes, you are correct, but this formula cannot accommodate when ##r=a##. This is a Laplace equation on a disk where boundary condition is ##r=a##. So this formula cannot be used.

So what? It can be used for all r < a, so you get a formula that is 100% correct for r < a. It is a separate issue altogether whether or not you can extend the answer to the case r = a. If you cannot, your beginning formulation must either be (i) applicable only to r < a; or (ii) in error somehow. There are separate issues that you are confounding, and that is leading to confusion on your part, or so it seems.

Anyway, if you do what I suggested you will get exactly what the book says. If you don't agree with the method and the answer, you are saying that you disagree with the book as well.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
Ok, if you insist.
yungman said:
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}+\frac{\frac{r^{n+1}e^{-j(n+1)(\theta-\phi)}}{a^n}} {a-re^{-j(\theta-\phi)}}=0[/tex]

I have no idea how to make this zero, please help.
There is a common factor in the numerator of both fractions, can you locate it ?
 
  • #23
montadhar said:
Ok, if you insist.

There is a common factor in the numerator of both fractions, can you locate it ?

I know I can pull out ##\frac {r^{n+1}}{a^n}##. But that does not help to make the whole thing to zero.
 
  • #24
yungman said:
I know I can pull out ##\frac {r^{n+1}}{a^n}##. But that does not help to make the whole thing to zero.

It is NOT zero, and there is no reason why it should be. All you need is
[tex]\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{r^{n+1}}{a^n} = 0[/tex]
and that is true if ##r < a.## Have you forgotten what is meant by the sum of an infinite series?
 
  • #25
Ray Vickson said:
It is NOT zero, and there is no reason why it should be. All you need is
[tex]\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{r^{n+1}}{a^n} = 0[/tex]
and that is true if ##r < a.## Have you forgotten what is meant by the sum of an infinite series?

No I did not forget, I need to have the formula work for ##r=a##. This is the solution of Laplace with boundary condition at ##r=a##. You cannot say the OP was wrong from the book and only look at ##r<a##. Solution has to be continuous at the boundary.

Also, the method in the OP was suggested by the book. I just cannot cancel it out.
 
Last edited:
  • #26
This is the copy of the book, it's for Laplace on a disk ##r=a## with boundary condition. Please ignore my writing.


166217[/ATTACH]"]
kre4i.jpg




The method the book referred to in section 5.5 is as follow:

166219[/ATTACH]"]
264jmzp.jpg
 

Attachments

  • kre4i.jpg
    kre4i.jpg
    45.9 KB · Views: 404
  • 264jmzp.jpg
    264jmzp.jpg
    62.8 KB · Views: 397
Last edited:
  • #27
yungman said:
This is the copy of the book, it's for Laplace on a disk ##r=a## with boundary condition. Please ignore my writing.


166221[/ATTACH]"]
kre4i.jpg

https://www.math.okstate.edu/~binegar/4263/4263-l15.pdf
look at Eqn 17, they indeed used the infinite sum of a geometric series.
 

Attachments

  • kre4i.jpg
    kre4i.jpg
    45.9 KB · Views: 330
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #29
montadhar said:
https://www.math.okstate.edu/~binegar/4263/4263-l15.pdf
look at Eqn 17, they indeed used the infinite sum of a geometric series.

I read through the article, but the article never address the issue of ##r=a## as I pointed out. The original formula
[tex]u=A_0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n[A_n\cos(n\theta)+B_n\sin(n\theta)][/tex]
can accommodate ##r=a##, but not using the assumption of ##\sum_0^{\infty} x^n=\frac{1}{1-x}##

This formula has to be working with boundary condition, you cannot have undefined value on the boundary ##r=a##.
I just don't get this. Can you explain how you justify using this formula?
 
  • #30
[tex] [Acos(θ)+Bsin(θ)] [/tex] is less than one ?
the entire term being less than 1 is what matters
 
  • #31
montadhar said:
[tex] [Acos(θ)+Bsin(θ)] [/tex] is less than one ?
the entire term being less than 1 is what matters

There is no saying that ##A_n## and ##B_n## are smaller than one. Besides, your assumption will limit the solution to be less than 1, that is not right.
 
  • #32
yungman said:
There is no saying that ##A_n## and ##B_n## are smaller than one. Besides, your assumption will limit the solution to be less than 1, that is not right.

You seem to think that a solution of Laplace's equation in the open disk ##r < a## must necessarily be continuous on the closed disk ##r \leq a##. There is no reason for anything like that to be true; we often face problems of solving a PDE in the interior of a set ##S##, but with a boundary condition on the boundary ##\partial S## that is not everywhere continuous.

Take the current example: the book gives you a function
[tex] U(r,\theta-\phi) = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{a^2 + r^2 - 2 a r \cos(\theta - \phi)}. [/tex]
Below, let ##t = \theta - \phi## for ease of writing.

It is easy to verify directly that ##U## solves Laplace's equation in the open region ##r < a##. Furthermore, for every point ##(a,t_0)## with ##t_0 \neq 0## the function is continuous at ##(a,t_0)##; that is,
[tex] \lim_{(r,t) \to (a,t_0)} = 0 = U(a,t_0).[/tex]
However, ##U## is not continuous at ##(a,0)## (or at ##(a, \pm 2 \pi n), n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots##). For example, for ##r = a## we have
[tex]U(a,t) = 0\; \forall\: t \neq 0, [/tex]
so ##\lim_{t \to 0} U(a,t) = 0.## However, for ##r \neq a## we have
[tex] U(r,0) = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{a^2+r^2 - 2 a r} = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{(a-r)^2} =
\frac{a+r}{a-r} \to +\infty\text{ as } r \to a-.[/tex]
So, the function given to you in the book does satisfy Laplace's equation in the open disc and is continuous except at a single point on the boundary of the disc.

Exactly the same thing happens in the infinite-series representation of ##U##. The fact that the series fails to converge at a single point with ##r = a## is not problem; the function ##U## is just not continuous there, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the infinite series (or, rather, is reflected properly in the infinite series, as it should be).
 
  • #33
Yes, I agree that there is no guaranty the solution is continuous. BUT if you look at the original equation:
[tex]u=A_0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n[A_n\cos(n\theta)+B_n\sin(n\theta)][/tex]

It is continuous at ##r=a##.

But if convert the above formula into this form:

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;\frac{1}{1-x}=\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

You have undefined solution whenever ##x=1##. That is not right!

You convert a continuous solution into one that has undefined solution.
 
  • #34
yungman said:
Yes, I agree that there is no guaranty the solution is continuous. BUT if you look at the original equation:
[tex]u=A_0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n[A_n\cos(n\theta)+B_n\sin(n\theta)][/tex]

It is continuous at ##r=a##.

But if convert the above formula into this form:

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n e^{jn(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;x=\left(\frac{r}{a}\right) e^{j(\theta-\phi)}\;\Rightarrow\;\frac{1}{1-x}=\frac{a}{a-re^{j(\theta-\phi)}}[/tex]

You have undefined solution whenever ##x=1##. That is not right!

You convert a continuous solution into one that has undefined solution.

Stop blaming ME; all I did was expand on what the BOOK says. If you have a problem, take it up with the authors of the book!

Anyway, you cannot just say that your original Fourier series is continuous at r = a; you have to PROVE it. You will have trouble doing this, because such arguments are a lot harder than you might think. Anyway, I suspect you are wrong; I bet the function is NOT continuous on the whole circle r = a, and just saying so or wishing it to be true will not work.
 
  • #35
Ray Vickson said:
Stop blaming ME; all I did was expand on what the BOOK says. If you have a problem, take it up with the authors of the book!

Anyway, you cannot just say that your original Fourier series is continuous at r = a; you have to PROVE it. You will have trouble doing this, because such arguments are a lot harder than you might think. Anyway, I suspect you are wrong; I bet the function is NOT continuous on the whole circle r = a, and just saying so or wishing it to be true will not work.

I am not blaming you or disrespect you at all.

All I am saying is from the original formula where the exponential formula supposing derived from is continuous unless ##A_n## or ##B_n## is infinite.

[tex]u=A_0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{r}{a}\right)^n[A_n\cos(n\theta)+B_n\sin(n\theta)][/tex]

But the derived formula goes to infinite at ##r=a## no matter what.

This is really a question than disrespecting you. I am an engineer that trying to learn math, I am not in the same league to disrespect you or anyone that is homework helper here! I am desperately trying to derive and making sense of this.

Far as I know, using ##\sum_0^{\infty} x^n=\frac{1}{1-x}## require ##x\neq 1## no matter what. That's the limitation that has to be imposed on this series expansion.
 

1. What are complex exponentials?

Complex exponentials are expressions of the form e^(ix), where i is the imaginary unit (√-1) and x is a real number. These expressions are often used in mathematics and physics to represent oscillatory or rotating phenomena.

2. How do you solve a series with complex exponentials?

To solve a series with complex exponentials, you can use techniques such as the geometric series formula, Euler's formula, and the method of undetermined coefficients. These methods involve manipulating the series and using properties of complex numbers to simplify the expressions.

3. What are some applications of solving series with complex exponentials?

Solving series with complex exponentials has many applications in various fields of science and engineering. For example, it is used in signal processing to analyze and manipulate signals, in quantum mechanics to describe the behavior of particles, and in electrical engineering to model and design circuits.

4. Are there any limitations to solving series with complex exponentials?

While solving series with complex exponentials can be a powerful tool, it does have some limitations. For example, it may not be applicable to all types of series and may require advanced mathematical knowledge. Additionally, it may not always provide exact solutions and may require approximations.

5. What are some tips for solving series with complex exponentials?

Some tips for solving series with complex exponentials include being familiar with properties of complex numbers, understanding the geometric interpretation of complex exponentials, and knowing when to use different methods such as the geometric series formula or Euler's formula. It is also important to carefully manipulate the series and check for convergence before applying any techniques.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
563
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
391
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
139
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
958
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
657
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
418
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
524
Back
Top