Transforming a Non-Linear DE into Bernoulli's Form

  • Thread starter Thread starter fluidistic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    First order Linear
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the differential equation 2xyy' = 4x^2 + 3y^2, which is initially not in Bernoulli's form. Participants explore various methods to transform the equation into a more manageable format, including the potential use of substitutions and the identification of the equation's characteristics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the possibility of transforming the original differential equation into Bernoulli's form through substitutions and variable changes. Some suggest that the equation may actually be homogeneous rather than Bernoulli. Others explore the implications of using the substitution v = y/x and the challenges that arise from implicit differentiation.

Discussion Status

There is an active exchange of ideas, with participants providing hints and guidance on how to approach the problem. Some have successfully transformed the equation using substitutions, while others are still grappling with the implications of their methods. The discussion reflects a collaborative effort to clarify the steps needed to progress further.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the equation and the potential for multiple interpretations regarding its classification and solution methods. There is an acknowledgment of the need to eliminate certain variables to simplify the problem, as well as the constraints imposed by homework guidelines.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,934
Reaction score
286

Homework Statement


Solve the following DE: [itex]2xyy'=4x^2+3y^2[/itex].


Homework Equations


Bernoulli's DE: [itex]y'+P(x)y=Q(x)y^2[/itex].


The Attempt at a Solution


I know that the original DE isn't under Bernoulli's form, but I have thought a lot on the problem and my feeling is that if I could find a change of variable to transform the general DE into a Bernoulli's equation, I'd be done. I have tried [itex]z=4x^2+3y^2[/itex], so [itex]z'=8x+6yy'[/itex] but this leads me nowhere. I am not even sure I can reduce the original DE into a Bernoulli's equation. This is the only way I think I could solve the DE, I don't see any other way.
I'd love some help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I know that the original DE isn't under Bernoulli's form, but I have thought a lot on the problem

Divide both sides by x^2

=)
 
Don't you think this should be homogenous ODE instead of Bernoulli? :smile:
 
Okay thanks guys. I divided by x² but was stuck right away.
I checked out if it was homogeneous and indeed it was homogeneous of first order. I then opened my cookbook for DE's (Boas, 2nd edition) and followed his advice. I wrote the DE under the form [itex]P(x,y)dx+Q(x,y)dy=0[/itex], with [itex]P(x,y)=-4x^2-3y^2[/itex] and [itex]Q(x,y)=2xy[/itex]. He says I can write the DE under the form [itex]y'=f(y/x)[/itex].
And thus the change of variable [itex]v=y/x[/itex] is appropriate, according to him. The DE should then be separable. However I tried but got stuck.
I reach [itex]2x^3vdv+2x^2v^2dx-4x^2-3[x^2(dv)^2+xvdvdx+v^2(dx)^2]=0[/itex]. I don't know how to deal with the squared differentials nor the crossed ones (dxdv).
Any further help will also be appreciated. :)
 
You should not have squared differentials. If you are using the substitution v = y/x , presumably to replace the y , then you need to differentiate implicitly y = vx to find dy/dx in terms of dv/dx . You should be able to use this to replace y' with v' (and also y/x with v ) to produce a transformed differential equation that is easier to work with. (The result isn't pretty, but it is separable and integrable...)
 
Last edited:
Just to give you a little hint:

[tex]2xyy'=4x^{2}+3y^{2}[/tex]

divide by 2xy throughout:

[tex]y'=2(x/y)+3(y/x)[/tex]

Let v=y/x ,

dv/dx = ?
 
Thanks once again guys!
dynamicsolo said:
You should not have squared differentials. If you are using the substitution v = y/x , presumably to replace the y , then you need to differentiate implicitly y = vx to find dy/dx in terms of dv/dx . You should be able to use this to replace y' with v' (and also y/x with v ) to produce a transformed differential equation that is easier to work with. (The result isn't pretty, but it is separable and integrable...)
[itex]y=xv \Rightarrow \frac{dy}{dx}=v+x \frac{dv}{dx}[/itex].
Thus the original DE transforms into [itex]v+x\frac{dv}{dx}=2v+\frac{3}{2v}\Rightarrow \frac{xdv}{dx}=v+\frac{3}{2v} \Rightarrow \frac{dx}{x}=\left ( v+\frac{3}{2v} \right ) ^{-1}dv[/itex]. Now I must integrate to get v(x). Once I have v(x) I divide it by x in order to get y(x).
icystrike said:
Just to give you a little hint:

[tex]2xyy'=4x^{2}+3y^{2}[/tex]

divide by 2xy throughout:

[tex]y'=2(x/y)+3(y/x)[/tex]

Let v=y/x ,

dv/dx = ?
I tried this way too but strangely I don't get "nice" stuff. [itex]dv/dx= \frac{1}{x^2} \left ( \frac{xdy}{dx}-y \right )[/itex]. If I isolate dy/dx, I don't even reach the one I got from the above way. All this, despite that y=xv in the first case and v=y/x in the second case. I don't understand how I can reach a different differential for dy/dx...
 
fluidistic said:
Thanks once again guys!
[itex]y=xv \Rightarrow \frac{dy}{dx}=v+x \frac{dv}{dx}[/itex].
Thus the original DE transforms into [itex]v+x\frac{dv}{dx}=2v+\frac{3}{2v}\Rightarrow \frac{xdv}{dx}=v+\frac{3}{2v} \Rightarrow \frac{dx}{x}=\left ( v+\frac{3}{2v} \right ) ^{-1}dv[/itex]. Now I must integrate to get v(x). Once I have v(x) I divide it by x in order to get y(x).

OK, so far. (And, yes, icystrike has a small typo in the resulting equation. The "3" should be "3/2"...)

I tried this way too but strangely I don't get "nice" stuff. [itex]dv/dx= \frac{1}{x^2} \left ( \frac{xdy}{dx}-y \right )[/itex].

You shouldn't still have that "y" kicking around in there. (I thought you were going from icystrike's equation, so this is a little puzzling. You should again have [itex]v + x\frac{dv}{dx} = 2v + \frac{3}{2v}[/itex].)

As I said above, the result isn't going to be very pretty. (Solutions of DEs often aren't...) You would reduce your transformed equation to [itex]\frac{dx}{x} = ( \frac{2v}{2v^{2} + 3} ) dv[/itex] and integrate from there.
 
Last edited:
Thank you again for your help.
dynamicsolo said:
OK, so far. (And, yes, icystrike has a small typo in the resulting equation. The "3" should be "3/2"...)
Ah I see.


You shouldn't still have that "y" kicking around in there. (I thought you were going from icystrike's equation, so this is a little puzzling. You should again have [itex]v + x\frac{dv}{dx} = 2v + \frac{3}{2v}[/itex].)
Well I used the derivative of the quotient y(x)/x. It's [y'(x)x-y(x)]/x²
As I said above, the result isn't going to be very pretty. (Solutions of DEs often aren't...) You would reduce your transformed equation to [itex]\frac{dx}{x} = ( \frac{2v}{2v^{2} + 3} ) dv[/itex] and integrate from there.
I see. I think you have a small typo in the right hand side (I think you forgot a ^-1).
 
  • #10
fluidistic said:
I think you have a small typo in the right hand side (I think you forgot a ^-1).

I already added the ratios and "flipped over" the result from your differential equation result for v : [itex]( v+\frac{3}{2v} ) ^{-1} = \frac{2v}{2v^{2} + 3}[/itex] .
 
  • #11
dynamicsolo said:
I already added the ratios and "flipped over" the result from your differential equation result for v : [itex]( v+\frac{3}{2v} ) ^{-1} = \frac{2v}{2v^{2} + 3}[/itex] .

Ah right I see now!
Do you have an idea what's my problem using icystrike's suggestion? Why can't I get rid of the y term and I don't reach the same expression for dv/dx.
 
  • #12
fluidistic said:
Ah right I see now!
Do you have an idea what's my problem using icystrike's suggestion? Why can't I get rid of the y term and I don't reach the same expression for dv/dx.

To be frank, I am still trying to figure out how you arrived at your result. The intent of icystrike's suggestion was to use v = y/x to completely eliminate y from the equation; you use Bernoulli's (whichever of the nine of them it was) idea to transform the original differential equation into a new one involving v and x that (hopefully) is easier to solve.

By making only a partial substitution, you created a situation that is harder to resolve algebraically than it needs to be. (It can probably be solved from there, but less easily. You would get rid of the y term by using y = vx .)
 
  • #13
The equation contains y2 and 2yy'=(y2)', this suggest the substitution z=y2. With this substitution, the equation becomes linear.

ehild
 
  • #14
Icystricke asked me dv/dx rather than dy/dx in function of dv/dx.
What I did for his way is [itex]v=y/x \Rightarrow \frac{dv}{dx}= \left ( \frac{xdy}{dx} -y \right ) \frac{1}{x^2}[/itex].
WOW! This work too! After isolating dy/dx and replacing y/x by v, I reach exactly the same expression for dy/dx than you. Nice!
Thanks guys for all your help. :biggrin:Edit: Okay thanks a lot ehild. I'm going to try this tomorrow (it's past 2 am here).
 
  • #15
fluidistic said:
Edit: Okay thanks a lot ehild. I'm going to try this tomorrow (it's past 2 am here).
Then you live far to west from me. :smile:
Just to be able to check your derivation: it should be very easy, and results in y2=cx3-4x2.

ehild
 
  • #16
ehild said:
The equation contains y2 and 2yy'=(y2)', this suggest the substitution z=y2. With this substitution, the equation becomes linear.

ehild

Thank you -- that's good spotting and the result for y is faster to extract than it is to do so from v . (I assumed from the initial post that it was required to use Bernoulli's method.)
 
  • #17
dynamicsolo said:
Thank you -- that's good spotting and the result for y is faster to extract than it is to do so from v . (I assumed from the initial post that it was required to use Bernoulli's method.)

Yes TS should try this method too. That is a direct consequence of implicit diff.
 
  • #18
Thanks. So I reached the same solution as yours. Problem solved. :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K