Trying to obtain a 2nd order ODE

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AAli
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2nd order Ode
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around obtaining a second-order ordinary differential equation (ODE) with respect to x through implicit differentiation. Participants explore various approaches to reformulate the problem, including converting to first-order equations and addressing the clarity of terms used in the original question.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in obtaining a second-order ODE and seeks assistance.
  • Another participant questions the productivity of obtaining a second-order ODE and suggests moving terms involving dy/dx to one side to solve for dy/dx instead.
  • A participant indicates a goal of deriving coupled first-order differential equations from the second-order ODE and requests clarification on a suggested approach.
  • There is a correction regarding the terminology of "2nd ODE," emphasizing clarity in communication.
  • One participant provides a derived expression for dy/dx, noting a potential sign error in the fraction.
  • Another participant reports a different expression for dy/dx after following the advice given, indicating a discrepancy in the results.
  • A participant acknowledges a mistake in their earlier expression and suggests reintroducing coefficients for further factorization.
  • One participant proposes a simplified expression for dy/dx, questioning the complexity of the previous discussions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to obtain the second-order ODE or the clarity of the terminology used. Multiple competing views on the methodology remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the assumptions made in the problem, the definitions of terms used, and the implications of removing coefficients from the original equation.

AAli
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi I'm having a slight issue trying to obtain a 2nd order ODE with respect to x (so involves implicit differentiation in this case) from the equation below. I would greatly appreciate any help or tips to solve this problem.
Screen Shot 2018-01-06 at 17.06.57.png

I've removed the coefficients to make things a litter easier. Thank you.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-01-06 at 17.06.57.png
    Screen Shot 2018-01-06 at 17.06.57.png
    1.7 KB · Views: 968
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
AAli said:
Hi I'm having a slight issue trying to obtain a 2nd ODE with respect to x (so involves implicit differentiation in this case) from the equation below. I would greatly appreciate any help or tips to solve this problem.

I've removed the coefficients to make things a litter easier. Thank you.
Your question isn't clear to me. Are you trying to obtain a 2nd order ODE? If so, I'm not sure that will lead to anything productive. A different approach would be to move all the terms involving dy/dx to one side, and then solve for dy/dx in terms of everything else. The resulting equation is separable, so it's possible a solution could be found without resorting to the implicit differentiation you're talking about.
 
Mark44 said:
Your question isn't clear to me. Are you trying to obtain a 2nd order ODE? If so, I'm not sure that will lead to anything productive. A different approach would be to move all the terms involving dy/dx to one side, and then solve for dy/dx in terms of everything else. The resulting equation is separable, so it's possible a solution could be found without resorting to the implicit differentiation you're talking about.

Hi, my goal was to eventually obtain a set of coupled first order differential equations from the 2nd order ODE, so I'm happy to try a quicker approach to solve this problem. Could you please elaborate on the highlighted bit. Thank you.

Edit: order
 
AAli said:
Hi, my goal was to eventually obtain a set of coupled first order differential equations from the 2nd ODE, so I'm happy to try a quicker approach to solve this problem. Could you please elaborate on the highlighted bit. Thank you.
"2nd ODE" does not mean "second order differential equation." Please try to be more clear in what you write. Edit: I see that you have edited your post to include the word "order."

The strategy you're describing won't work, as far as I can tell. It does no good to convert a 1st-order DE to 2nd order for the purpose obtaining two first-order DEs.
What I'm suggesting is to move all the terms in dy/dx to one side, and then solve algebraically for dy/dx.
I get ##\frac {dy}{dx} = \frac{y^{1/2}(1 - y^{1/2} - y)}{y^{1/2}(y^{-1/2} + 1 - y)}##.
This is separable, and would be very simple to solve except for one sign in the fraction on the right.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: AAli
Mark44 said:
"2nd ODE" does not mean "second order differential equation." Please try to be more clear in what you write. Edit: I see that you have edited your post to include the word "order."

The strategy you're describing won't work, as far as I can tell. It does no good to convert a 1st-order DE to 2nd order for the purpose obtaining two first-order DEs.
What I'm suggesting is to move all the terms in dy/dx to one side, and then solve algebraically for dy/dx.
I get ##\frac {dy}{dx} = \frac{y^{1/2}(1 - y^{1/2} - y)}{y^{1/2}(y^{-1/2} + 1 - y)}##.
This is separable, and would be very simple to solve except for one sign in the fraction on the right.

I did as you advised but I got something slightly different:

##\frac {dy}{dx} = \frac{y^{1/2}(1 - y^{1/2} - y)}{y^{1/2}(y^{-1/2} + 1 - y^{-3/2})}##.
 
AAli said:
I did as you advised but I got something slightly different:

##\frac {dy}{dx} = \frac{y^{1/2}(1 - y^{1/2} - y)}{y^{1/2}(y^{-1/2} + 1 - y^{-3/2})}##.
Yes, I made a mistake on the last term in the denominator.

You mentioned earlier that you removed the coefficients. You should put them back in, as both numerator and denominator might be further factorable.
 
:olduhh: Isn't it just dy/dx = - y. ?
 

Similar threads

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