Verify the PDE has the following solution

  • Thread starter Thread starter docnet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pde
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on verifying the solution to the wave equation represented by the partial differential equation (PDE) ##\partial_t^2 - \partial_x^2 = 0##. The user demonstrates their approach by calculating the partial derivatives of the function ##u(t,x) = f(x-t) + g(x+t)##, leading to the conclusion that both components satisfy the wave equation. Despite arriving at the correct formulation, the user expresses uncertainty regarding the sufficiency of their proof, particularly in relation to the conditions at ##t=0##. The consensus is that the proof is valid and the user's doubts are unfounded.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave equations in physics
  • Familiarity with partial derivatives
  • Knowledge of the method of characteristics
  • Basic concepts of function composition
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the method of characteristics for solving PDEs
  • Learn about the implications of initial conditions in wave equations
  • Explore the concept of superposition in wave functions
  • Investigate the role of boundary conditions in PDE solutions
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics and physics, particularly those focused on solving partial differential equations and understanding wave phenomena.

docnet
Messages
796
Reaction score
486
Homework Statement
Verify the PDE has the following solution
Relevant Equations
##u(t,x)=f(x-t)+g(x+t)##
Screen Shot 2021-01-24 at 2.49.16 AM.png
Hello, please lend give me your wisdom.

I suspect this problem is about the wave equation ##\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2=0## commonly encountered in physics. I tried a search for information but I could not find help.

Attempt at arriving at solution:

So I took the partial derivatives of ##u(t,x)=f(x-t)+g(x+t)##

##\partial_t u=-\partial_tf(x-t)+\partial_tg(x+t)##
##\partial_t^2 u=\partial_t^2f(x-t)+\partial_t^2g(x+t)##
##\partial_x u=\partial_xf(x-t)+\partial_xg(x+t)##
##\partial_x^2 u=\partial_x^2f(x-t)+\partial_x^2g(x+t)##

Giving
##\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2 =0##
##\partial_t^2f(x-t)+\partial_t^2g(x+t) -\partial_x^2f(x-t)-\partial_x^2g(x+t)=0##
##\partial_t^2f(x-t) -\partial_x^2f(x-t)+\partial_t^2g(x+t)-\partial_x^2g(x+t)=0##

I try to reason if the last line is true, then so is ##\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2=0## because it shows
##\partial_t^2f(x-t) -\partial_x^2f(x-t)=0, \partial_t^2g(x+t)-\partial_x^2g(x+t)=0##.
Although it does not feel sufficient.

For ##u=f+g## I can set ##t=0## in ##u(t,x)=f(x-t)+g(x+t)## and just get back ##u=f+g##.

For ##\partial_t u=-f+g## I can take ##\partial_t u=-\partial_tf(x-t)+\partial_tg(x+t)## and set ##t=0## to get back ##\partial_t u=-\partial_tf+\partial_tg##. So the last condition is not satisfied unless setting t=0 somehow means removing ##\partial_t## from both terms.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If that from a book?
Unless I missed something I am confused why the second condition is not
$$\partial_tu=-f^\prime+g^\prime \textrm{ on } \{t=0\}\times\mathbb{R}$$
 
  • Like
Likes docnet
It seems like you have proven it and then doubt your own proof. I see nothing wrong with your proof and do not understand why you doubt it.
 
  • Like
Likes docnet

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K