MHB Why is the solution to the Volterra integral equation written as a power series?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sarrah1
  • Start date Start date
sarrah1
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
I have this Volterra integral equation

$X(t)=e^{At}+\int_{0}^{t} \,e^{A(t-\tau)}\epsilon BX(\tau) d\tau$ (1) ,
of matrix solution $X(t)$ and $X(0)=I$, $A,B\in{R}^{n\times n}$ ,

By iteration:
Result 1 : the solution $X(t)$ of (1) can be written as a power series in $\epsilon$ in the form
$X(t)=e^{At}+\sum_{1}^{\infty}{\epsilon}^{n} {P}_{n}(t)$ (2)
where ${P}_{n}(t)$ satisfies the recurrence
${P}_{n}(t)= \int_{0}^{t} \,e^{A(t-\tau)}B {P}_{n-1}(\tau) d\tau$ , ${P}_{0}(t)={e}^{At}$ (3)
proof is by substituting (2) into (1) and equating equal powers of $\epsilon$

Result 2 : The series (2) is uniformly convergent in in some interval of $t$ for sufficiently small $\epsilon$
Proof: $||{P}_{1}(t)||\le \int_{0}^{t} \,e^{||A||(t-\tau)}||B|| {e}^{||A||\tau} d\tau$
$\le||B||{e}^{||A||t}\int_{0}^{t} \,{e}^{||A||(t-\tau)}d\tau$
$\le||B||{e}^{||A||t}t{e}^{||A||t}$
similarly
$||{P}_{2}(t)||\le{e}^{||A||t}{(t||B||{e}^{||A||t})}^{2}$ etc...
Thus the series in (2) is absolutely convergent if $\epsilon t||B||{e}^{||A||t}<1$.
According to Wieirstrass M-test, the series $\sum_{1}^{\infty}{\epsilon}^{n} {P}_{n}(t)$ converges uniformly on some interval
$[0,t:\epsilon t||B||{e}^{||A||t}<1]$.

very grateful

Sarrah

it is result 2 which I care for
Sarrah
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi sarrah,

Why is

$$\|P_1(t)\| \le \int_0^t e^{\|A\|(t - \tau)}\|B\|e^{\|A\|\tau}\,d\tau?$$

It appears you used a Minkowski type inequality, but what norm are you using?

Given your bounds are correct, the last statements you made do not make sense. The interval you speak of should be independent of $t$.
 
Euge said:
Hi sarrah,

Why is

$$\|P_1(t)\| \le \int_0^t e^{\|A\|(t - \tau)}\|B\|e^{\|A\|\tau}\,d\tau?$$

It appears you used a Minkowski type inequality, but what norm are you using?

Given your bounds are correct, the last statements you made do not make sense. The interval you speak of should be independent of $t$.

thank you Euge you always are there for help.
concerning the inequality I am using the rule "Norm of integral of a function is less than the integral of its norm" I assume this applies to any norm,

Now the norm of $||{e}^{A(t-\tau)}B{e}^{A\tau}||$ is less than the product of their norms (you are right I am using a sub-multiplicative norm)and I am using Minkowski inequality for the series say $||{e}^{A\tau}||\le{e}^{||A||\tau}$ as I am adding up the norm of each term of its Taylor's series expansion.
Concerning your second criticism, you are right, I couldn't define the closed interval in which the series converges uniformly. So I showed absolute convergence based upon the condition $t\epsilon||B||{e}^{||A||t}<1$ from which an interval of $t$ can be obtained say $[0,{t}_{0}]$, where ${t}_{0}$ is the max $t$ satisfying the inequality. I didn't designate this interval as I will have to solve for $t$ the foregoing inequality being difficult involving logarithm. Another problem now even if I could solve for $t$ then uniform convergence is on $[0,t)$ , but one is accustomed to be on a closed interval
again very grateful
sarrah
 
Last edited:
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K