Why the domain of a DE solution must be an interval?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cathode-ray
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Domain Interval
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The domain of solutions for differential equations must be defined within an interval due to the nature of boundary conditions affecting solutions in connected regions. For the initial value problem \(\frac{dy}{dt} + \frac{1}{t}y=0, y(1)=1\), the solution is \(y(t)=1/t\) with a domain of \(]0,+\infty[\). While it is mathematically possible to define the solution on the set \(]-\infty,0[ U ]0,+\infty[\), the boundary condition at \(t=1\) only determines the solution in the positive interval, leaving the negative interval undefined. Thus, combining disconnected regions into a single general solution offers limited value.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential equations and initial value problems
  • Familiarity with boundary conditions in mathematical modeling
  • Knowledge of interval notation and its implications in mathematics
  • Basic concepts of continuity and connected regions in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of boundary conditions in differential equations
  • Explore the concept of connected regions in mathematical analysis
  • Learn about general solutions and their applications in physical modeling
  • Investigate the role of constants in differential equations and their significance
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and professionals interested in differential equations, boundary value problems, and their applications in modeling physical phenomena.

cathode-ray
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone!

I started studying differential equations, but I still didn't understand why the domain of the solutions must be defined in an interval. For example the solution of the following initial value problem:

[tex]\frac{dy}{dt} + \frac{1}{t}y=0,y(1)=1[/tex]

is given by y(t)=1/t that has it's domain in the interval ]0,+infinity[. Why can't it be defined in the set ]-infinity,0[ U ]0,+infinity[?

It just makes sense to me if we are using the solution to model a physical situation but mathematically I don't get it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cathode-ray said:
Why can't it be defined in the set ]-infinity,0[ U ]0,+infinity[?

It can be defined on that set if you want to.

The general solution on ]-infinity,0[ U ]0,+infinity[ is

y = A/t when t > 0
y = B/t when t < 0
where A and B are two independent constants.

The boundary conditions at a point can only affect the solution in a connected region containing that point. Your boundary condtion at t =1 fixes the value of A, but tells you nothing about the value of B.

So there is not usually much added value in lumping disconnected regions together into one "general solution".
 
AlephZero said:
The boundary conditions at a point can only affect the solution in a connected region containing that point. Your boundary condtion at t =1 fixes the value of A, but tells you nothing about the value of B.

So there is not usually much added value in lumping disconnected regions together into one "general solution".

I hadn't thought about this. Now it makes sense.

Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K