Solving this type of recurrence equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter samuelandjw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Recurrence Type
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving the recurrence equation (1-g_{i+1})P_{i+1}-P_{i}+g_{i-1}P_{i-1}=0 for P_{i} with periodic boundary conditions. It is noted that setting g and P as constant sequences provides a solution, but the original problem involves arbitrary g_i, leading to L simultaneous linear equations. A suggestion is made to consider whether a closed-form symbolic answer is desired rather than a numerical one. The use of z-transforms for linear constant coefficient difference equations is mentioned, although the contributor has not personally applied this method. The discrete Fourier transform is recommended for handling the periodic nature of P_{i} and g_{i}.
samuelandjw
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Hi,

The problem is to solve
(1-g_{i+1})P_{i+1}-P_{i}+g_{i-1}P_{i-1}=0
for P_{i}
with boundary condition
P_{i}=P_{i+L}, g_{i}=g_{i+L}
Can anyone provide any guide of solving this type of recurence equation?
Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't know of any general methods for solving recurrence relations in several unknown functions.

Since setting g and P to be constant sequences gives a solution to the problem, I suggest that you state additional conditions that g and P must satistfy if having them constant isn't what you are after.
 
Stephen Tashi said:
I don't know of any general methods for solving recurrence relations in several unknown functions.

Since setting g and P to be constant sequences gives a solution to the problem, I suggest that you state additional conditions that g and P must satistfy if having them constant isn't what you are after.

Thanks for your reply.

In my problem, g_i is given and arbitrary, so in general g_i is not a constant sequence.
 
Then, as I interpret the problem, it amounts to solving L simultaneous linear equations with constant coefficients and unknowns P_1,P_2,..P_L.

Are you looking for a closed form symbolic answer instead of a numerical one?

( The wikipedia article on "recurrence relation" says that linear constant coefficient difference equations can be solved with z-transforms. I, myself, have never done that. )
 
Because both \lbrace P_{i}\rbrace and \lbrace g_{i}\rbrace are period with a common period of L, you should use the discrete Fourier transform:

<br /> P_{i} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}} \, \sum_{k = 0}^{L - 1}{\tilde{P}_{k} \, \exp{\left(\frac{2 \pi j k \, i}{L}\right)}}<br />
and similarly for g_{i}. Then you will use the convolution theorem for the products.
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top