What is wrong with my Laplace Transform inversion for y''+13y'-4y = 3exp(-t)?

maistral
Messages
235
Reaction score
17
I'm inverting this:

Y = s2 + 15s + 17 / [(s+1)(s2 + 13s - 4)]

I'm using PF expansion,

A/(s+1) + Bs + C/(s2 + 13s - 4), I however keep on getting wrong answers, seeing how Runge-Kutta and Taylor approximation disagrees with my final equation.

My final equation is:

exp(-13/2t)[19/16cosh√(185)/2t + 13√(185)/74sinh√(185)/2t] - 3/16exp(-t) = y, and it's wrong (considering Runge-Kutta and Taylor approximation disagrees with it).

Obviously, something's wrong. What did I miss? I'm starting to think that the second term is.. well, there's something wrong with it (Bs + C term). I mean, the numerator is a quadratic, therefore it can't be that simple...NOTE: This is NOT homework. I did this to merely tickle my head. The original differential equation is y"+13y'-4y = 3exp(-t), y(0) = y'(0) = 1.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And apparently according to this site, my inverse is:
http://wims.unice.fr/wims/wims.gif?cmd=getins&session=7D0AB1E6C0.3&special_parm=insert-1.gif&modif=1347637563

Crap, what is that i doing there?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Direction Fields and Isoclines'
I sketched the isoclines for $$ m=-1,0,1,2 $$. Since both $$ \frac{dy}{dx} $$ and $$ D_{y} \frac{dy}{dx} $$ are continuous on the square region R defined by $$ -4\leq x \leq 4, -4 \leq y \leq 4 $$ the existence and uniqueness theorem guarantees that if we pick a point in the interior that lies on an isocline there will be a unique differentiable function (solution) passing through that point. I understand that a solution exists but I unsure how to actually sketch it. For example, consider a...
Back
Top