Solving the D'Alembert-Claureaut Equation for a Unit Speed Geodesic in the Plane

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lavinia
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ode
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the D'Alembert-Claureaut equation for a unit speed geodesic in the plane, specifically addressing the mathematical formulation and potential methods for solving the equation. The scope includes theoretical exploration and mathematical reasoning related to differential equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equation dc/dx = x^{2}e^{-xc} as a starting point.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the complexity of the equation, noting it is non-separable and non-linear, yet only first order.
  • A suggestion is made to substitute u(x) ≡ x c(x) to derive a new ordinary differential equation (ODE) for u(x).
  • A later post corrects the initial equation to dc/dx = e^{-xc}, stating it relates to the y coordinate of a unit speed geodesic in a specific metric of constant negative curvature.
  • The same participant proposes that a conformal change of coordinates might simplify the equation.
  • Further elaboration includes an attempt to solve the equation in terms of c, leading to an implicit ODE of the D'Alembert-Claureaut type and questioning the possibility of finding a closed-form integral using elementary functions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct formulation of the equation or the methods for solving it. Multiple competing views and approaches are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the initial incorrect equation, the complexity of the proposed solutions, and the potential need for further clarification on the methods suggested for solving the ODE.

lavinia
Science Advisor
Messages
3,385
Reaction score
760
dc/dx = x[itex]^{2}[/itex]e[itex]^{-xc}[/itex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
?? it doesn't seem too simple, first its non separable non linear, but it is only first order. not quite sure what the post is for
 
Make the subst, [itex]u(x) \equiv x \, c(x)[/itex] and see what ODE you get for [itex]u(x)[/itex].
 
raymo39 said:
?? it doesn't seem too simple, first its non separable non linear, but it is only first order. not quite sure what the post is for

Hi Raymo I must apologise. The equationI wrote is wrong.

The right equation is dc/dx = e[itex]^{-xc}[/itex]

This solves for the y coordinate of a unit speed geodesic in the plane with a particular metric of constant negative curvature. The x coordinate is easy. Maybe a conformal change of coordinates would give an easier equation.
 
lavinia said:
Hi Raymo I must apologise. The equationI wrote is wrong.

The right equation is dc/dx = e[itex]^{-xc}[/itex]

This solves for the y coordinate of a unit speed geodesic in the plane with a particular metric of constant negative curvature. The x coordinate is easy. Maybe a conformal change of coordinates would give an easier equation.

Dickfore said:
Make the subst, [itex]u(x) \equiv x \, c(x)[/itex] and see what ODE you get for [itex]u(x)[/itex].

This is not a correct hint for this equation.

I think I found the way though. Solve your equation in terms of [itex]c[/itex]:

[tex] \ln c' = - x \, c[/tex]

[tex] c = -x \frac{1}{\ln p}, \ p \equiv c'(x)[/tex]

Your equation becomes an implicit ODE of the D'Alemebert - Clauraut type. It is reduced to a linear ODE w.r.t. [itex]x = x(p)[/itex] after differentiating w.r.t. [itex]x[/itex].

What differential equation do you get at this step? Can you perform the integral in a closed form using elementary functions?
 

Similar threads

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