The Wronskian and diff.equations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Susanne217
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wronskian
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a differential equation of the form y'' + p(x)·y' + q(x)y = 0, where two solutions, y_1(x) and y_2(x), are considered. The original poster seeks to demonstrate that a specific form of y_2, derived from y_1, is also a solution to the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions whether the properties of the Wronskian and Abel's identity theorem can be used to derive a constant related to the solutions. Some participants suggest using the method of reduction of order to find the second solution, indicating a process involving differentiation and substitution. Others inquire about the relationship between the proposed solution form and linear combinations of solutions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different methods and clarifying concepts related to the problem. There is no explicit consensus yet, but various approaches, including reduction of order, are being examined.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of dealing with functions as coefficients in the differential equation and express uncertainty about the absence of certain methods in standard textbooks.

Susanne217
Messages
311
Reaction score
0
Hi

Homework Statement



I have differential equation

[tex]y'' + p(x)\cdot x' + q(x)y = 0[/tex] which have two solutions [tex]y_1(x)[/tex] and [tex]y_2(x)[/tex] where [tex]y_1(x) \neq 0[/tex]


show that [tex]y_2(t) = y_1(t)\int_{t_0}^{t} \frac{1}{y_1(s)^2} e^{-\int_{t_0}^s p(r) dr} ds[/tex] is also a solution.

Homework Equations



I know that wronskian for this is defined

[tex]w(y_1,y_2)(t) = c \cdot e^{-\int p(t) dt}[/tex] according to Abels identity theorem.

The Attempt at a Solution



My question do I use this property of theorem and properties of the Wronskian to derive c?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Susanne -

The solution specified for y2 is the general form of a second solution to second order differential equation when the roots to its characteristic equation are repeated. I am not sure what to do when you have functions as coefficients, but perhaps if you can show your second order equation can be reduced to a second order equation with constant coefficients (with repeated roots), then you may assume the solution y2 = F(t)*y1 (F a function to be determined). Twice differentiating y2 and substituting it back into your original second order equation, you should obtain a new equation in terms of F', and F''. Hence you may let g = F' and obtain a first order, separable equation. Solve for g, then back-substitute F' and integrate to solve for F. Finally, since y2 = F(t)*y1, and since F(t) is known, you should get the answer specified for y2. Hope this helps.

- Sam
 
Samuelb88 said:
Susanne -

The solution specified for y2 is the general form of a second solution to second order differential equation when the roots to its characteristic equation are repeated. I am not sure what to do when you have functions as coefficients, but perhaps if you can show your second order equation can be reduced to a second order equation with constant coefficients (with repeated roots), then you may assume the solution y2 = F(t)*y1 (F a function to be determined). Twice differentiating y2 and substituting it back into your original second order equation, you should obtain a new equation in terms of F', and F''. Hence you may let g = F' and obtain a first order, separable equation. Solve for g, then back-substitute F' and integrate to solve for F. Finally, since y2 = F(t)*y1, and since F(t) is known, you should get the answer specified for y2. Hope this helps.

- Sam

does this have any relation to reduction of order tecnique ?
 
Yes, I believe the name of the method I described above is reduction of order. Sorry, I forgot its name.
 
Samuelb88 said:
Yes, I believe the name of the method I described above is reduction of order. Sorry, I forgot its name.

Why this isn't in my Calculus book. I don't know :(

Found this is a different textbook, but thanks ;)

Found this note here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_of_order

You seem to me more intelligent than me and therefore is the ansatz mentioned

[tex]y_2(x) = y_1(x) \cdot v(x)[/tex] can this be describe as linearcombination of first solution and the abtr function v(x)??
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K