Very simple: second order derivative in wave equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical justification for transitioning from a finite difference expression involving an array of masses connected by springs to the second order derivative in the context of wave equations. Participants explore the rigor behind the limit process as the step size approaches zero, focusing on continuity, differentiability, and the application of the Mean Value Theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to rigorously demonstrate the equivalence of two expressions involving limits and derivatives, specifically relating to the second order derivative.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of continuity and differentiability in the limit process, seeking a mathematical justification for manipulating the limits.
  • A third participant introduces the Mean Value Theorem to establish a connection between the finite difference expression and the second derivative, suggesting that this approach can lead to the desired result.
  • A later reply builds on the previous points, applying the Mean Value Theorem again to derive the limit and affirm the continuity of the second derivative, ultimately leading to a conclusion about the limit as \( h \) approaches zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the use of the Mean Value Theorem and the continuity of derivatives in the limit process, but the discussion contains varying levels of detail and rigor in the justification of the steps taken. There is no explicit consensus on the overall approach, as participants are exploring different aspects of the mathematical justification.

Contextual Notes

The discussion assumes that the function \( u(x) \) is twice continuously differentiable within a specified interval, which is critical for the application of the Mean Value Theorem. The dependence on the properties of limits and continuity is also noted, but not fully resolved.

mr_sparxx
Messages
31
Reaction score
5
In the equation regarding an array of masses connected by springs in wikipedia the step from
$$\frac {u(x+2h,t)-2u(x+h,t)+u(x,t)} { h^2}$$

To
$$\frac {\partial ^2 u(x,t)}{\partial x^2}$$

By making ##h \to 0## is making me wonder how is it rigorously demonstrated. I mean:
$$\frac {\partial ^2 u(x,t)}{\partial x^2} = \lim_{h\to 0} \frac {u_x(x+h,t)-u_x(x,t)} { h}$$
But we have
$$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac {u(x+2h,t)-2u(x+h,t)+u(x,t)} { h^2}=\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\frac {u(x+2h)-u(x+h)}{h}-\frac {u(x+h)-u(x)}{h}}{h}$$
How do we demonstrate that these two expressions are equal?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
By the way, I am using $$u_x(x,t) = \frac {\partial u} {\partial x}$$

I keep looking at it and it has to do with continuity, differentiability and properties of limits... but I cannot figure it out. Once again I would like to know the mathematical justification that states that doing the following is safe (I've get rid of the time dependency for simplicity):

$$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\frac {u(x+2h)-u(x+h)}{h}-\frac {u(x+h)-u(x)}{h}}{h} =
\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\lim_{d\to 0}\frac {u(x+h+d)-u(x+h)}{d}-\lim_{d\to 0}\frac {u(x+d)-u(x)}{d}}{h}$$
 
So, we assume that ##u(x)## is a twice continuously differentiable function in an interval ##I## which contains ##a##, and we want to prove that

##\lim_{h\to 0}\frac {u(a+2h)-2u(a+h)+u(a)}{h^2}=u''(a).##

Fix ##h## and put ##\phi(x)=u(x+h)-u(x)## for all ##x## such that both ##x## and ##x+h## lie in ##I##. Assuming that ##a+2h\in I##, we obtain, by the Mean Value Theorem:

##u(a+2h)-2u(a+h)+u(a)=\phi(a+h)-\phi(a)=\phi'(a+\theta h)h=(u'(a+\theta h +h) - u'(a+\theta h))h,##

for some ##\theta \in (0,1)##.

Then, you can use the Mean Value Theorem again and use that ##u''## is continuous at ##a## to obtain the desired result. I leave this as an exercise.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mr_sparxx
I see. Then, using the Mean Value Theorem again

##(a+2h)-2u(a+h)+u(a)=(u'(a+\theta h +h) - u'(a+\theta h))h = u''(a+\theta h + \lambda h) h^2##

for some ##\lambda \in (0,1)##, and using that ##u''(x)## is continuous,

##\lim_{h\to 0} \frac {u(a+2h)-2u(a+h)+u(a)}{h^2}=\lim_{h\to 0} u''(a+(\theta + \lambda) h) =u''(a) .##Thank you very much!
 

Similar threads

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