What is the Inequality for the Heat Equation?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the heat equation and the derivation of an inequality related to its solutions. Participants explore various mathematical manipulations and integrals involving the function \( u \) and its derivatives, aiming to establish properties of the integral of \( u^2 \) over a specified interval.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss multiplying the heat equation by \( 2u \) and integrating with respect to \( t \). There are attempts to derive a differential equation for the integral of \( u^2 \) and to show that this integral is a decreasing function. Questions arise about the implications of boundary conditions and the behavior of integrals over time.

Discussion Status

Several participants have offered insights into the integration process and the implications of boundary conditions. There is ongoing exploration of the uniqueness theorem related to the solutions of the heat equation, with some participants expressing uncertainty about the formalization of their findings.

Contextual Notes

Participants note specific boundary conditions for \( u(t,0) \) and \( u(t,1) \) being zero, which are relevant to the discussion of uniqueness and the behavior of the integral over time. There is acknowledgment of the need to examine the implications of these conditions on the derived inequalities.

mmmboh
Messages
401
Reaction score
0
29dtmrd.jpg


So I multiplied the heat equation by 2u, and put the substitution into the heat equation, and get 2uut-2uuxx=(u2)t=2(uux)x+2(ux)2.

I`m not sure where to go from there, I can integrate with respect to t, then I would have a u2 under the integral on the left side, but them I`m not sure where to go.

I also tried using the fact that the solution to the heat equation is
2eat5kg.jpg


And I said that the integral was less than
[tex]\int_{-infinity}^{infinity} \ f(y)dy[/tex]

and then I squared both sides, and said that the integral squared was less than the square of the integral. Then I integrated both sides with respect to x, but the problem is now, I have a double integral on the right side :S.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the idea is to derive a differential equation for the integral of u^2 w.r.t x from 0 to 1.
 
:cry: How do I do that?
 
To start with, use the hint and integrate over x from 0 to 1 and what do you get?
 
I think the idea is to show that:

[tex] \int_{0}^{1}u^{2}(t,x)dx[/tex]

is a decreasing function and so it will always be less than or equal to it's initial value, and so you get the inequality you are asked to prove.
 
[tex] \int_{0}^{1} \ (u^{2})_{t}dx = 2uu_{x}(1,t)-2uu_{x}(0,t)-2<br /> \int_{0}^{1} \ (u_{x})^{2}dx[/tex]

This is what I get.
 
Last edited:
Riiiight, I got the following equation:

[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial t}u^{2}=2\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left( u\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right) -2\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)^{2}[/tex]

Integrate this w.r.t. x from 0 to 1 and what do you get?
 
I fixed my equation, any way that`s what I get, but I don`t see what to do with it.
 
Do as I said and integrate to obtain:

[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\int_{0}^{1}u^{2}dx=2\left[ u(t,x)\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(t,x)\right]_{0}^{1}-2\int_{0}^{1}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)^{2}dx[/tex]

Now the stuff in the square brackets vanishes (why?). So what can't we say about:

[tex] \int_{0}^{1}u^{2}dx[/tex]
 
  • #10
? My equation is the same as yours, I just used subscript notation. If the stuff in the square brackets vanishes, then as you change t, [tex] <br /> \int_{0}^{1}u^{2}dx<br /> [/tex] decreases, so it will be smaller than [tex] <br /> \int_{0}^{1}f(x)^{2}dx<br /> [/tex]

since this is when t=0. Is that right?

Edit: The term in the square brackets vanishes because u(1,t)=u(0,t)=0.

So what would the uniqueness theorem be then? It`s always decreasing with respect to t, and u(x,t)=f(x) only once? I`m not sure.
 
  • #11
We're told that in the question, u(t,0)=u(t,1)=0.

Finally, you have the solution, but formally, i would say that:

[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\int_{0}^{1}u^{2}dx=-2\int_{0}^{1}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)^{2}dx\leqslant 0[/tex]

as the quantity in the integrand in positive, so the integral will be positive which shows that the quantity we spoke about is clearly decreasing.
 
  • #12
Thank you. You have been a great help. What do you think of my uniqueness theorem though? It does not seem like much of a theorem.

Edit: I guess it means that since the integral is decreasing, the solution to the heat equation with a boundary condition is unique...
 
  • #13
I edited my post.
 
  • #14
The usual way for uniqueness theorems is to assume that there are two solutions u_1 and u_2 and examine the quantity w=u_1-u_2 and show that the only possible case is w=0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K