In this section we need to take a look at the equation of a line in R 3 R 3 . As we saw in the previous section the equation y = m x + b y = m x + b does not describe a line in R 3 R 3 , instead it describes a plane. This doesn’t mean however that we can’t write down an equation for a line in 3-D space. We’re just going to need a new way of writing down the equation of a curve. So, before we get into the equations of lines we first need to briefly look at vector functions. We’re going to take a more in depth look at vector functions later. At this point all that we need to worry about is notational issues and how they can be used to give the equation of a curve. The best way to get an idea of what a vector function is and what its graph looks like is to look at an example. So, consider the following vector function. → r ( t ) = ⟨ t , 1 ⟩ r → ( t ) = ⟨ t , 1 ⟩ A vector function is a function that takes one or more variables, one in this case, and returns a vector. Note as we
Example 4 Use Separation of Variables on the following partial differential equation.
Now, as with the heat equation the two initial conditions are here only because they need to be here for the problem. We will not actually be doing anything with them here and as mentioned previously the product solution will rarely satisfy them. We will be dealing with those in a later section when we actually go past this first step. Again, the point of this example is only to get down to the two ordinary differential equations that separation of variables gives.
So, let’s get going on that and plug the product solution, (we switched the to an here to avoid confusion with the in the second initial condition) into the wave equation to get,
Note that we moved the to the right side for the same reason we moved the in the heat equation. It will make solving the boundary value problem a little easier.
Now that we’ve gotten the equation separated into a function of only on the left and a function of only on the right we can introduce a separation constant and again we’ll use so we can arrive at a boundary value problem that we are familiar with. So, after introducing the separation constant we get,
The two ordinary differential equations we get are then,
The boundary conditions in this example are identical to those from the first example and so plugging the product solution into the boundary conditions gives,
Applying separation of variables to this problem gives,
So, let’s get going on that and plug the product solution, (we switched the to an here to avoid confusion with the in the second initial condition) into the wave equation to get,
Note that we moved the to the right side for the same reason we moved the in the heat equation. It will make solving the boundary value problem a little easier.
Now that we’ve gotten the equation separated into a function of only on the left and a function of only on the right we can introduce a separation constant and again we’ll use so we can arrive at a boundary value problem that we are familiar with. So, after introducing the separation constant we get,
The two ordinary differential equations we get are then,
The boundary conditions in this example are identical to those from the first example and so plugging the product solution into the boundary conditions gives,
Applying separation of variables to this problem gives,
Next, let’s take a look at the 2-D Laplace’s Equation.
Example 5 Use Separation of Variables on the following partial differential equation.
This problem is a little (well actually quite a bit in some ways) different from the heat and wave equations. First, we no longer really have a time variable in the equation but instead we usually consider both variables to be spatial variables and we’ll be assuming that the two variables are in the ranges shown above in the problems statement. Note that this also means that we no longer have initial conditions, but instead we now have two sets of boundary conditions, one for and one for .
Also, we should point out that we have three of the boundary conditions homogeneous and one nonhomogeneous for a reason. When we get around to actually solving this Laplace’s Equation we’ll see that this is in fact required in order for us to find a solution.
For this problem we’ll use the product solution,
It will often be convenient to have the boundary conditions in hand that this product solution gives before we take care of the differential equation. In this case we have three homogeneous boundary conditions and so we’ll need to convert all of them. Because we’ve already converted these kind of boundary conditions we’ll leave it to you to verify that these will become,
Plugging this into the differential equation and separating gives,
Okay, now we need to decide upon a separation constant. Note that every time we’ve chosen the separation constant we did so to make sure that the differential equation
would show up. Of course, the letters might need to be different depending on how we defined our product solution (as they’ll need to be here). We know how to solve this eigenvalue/eigenfunction problem as we pointed out in the discussion after the first example. However, in order to solve it we need two boundary conditions.
So, for our problem here we can see that we’ve got two boundary conditions for but only one for and so we can see that the boundary value problem that we’ll have to solve will involve and so we need to pick a separation constant that will give use the boundary value problem we’ve already solved. In this case that means that we need to choose for the separation constant. If you’re not sure you believe that yet hold on for a second and you’ll soon see that it was in fact the correct choice here.
Putting the separation constant gives,
The two ordinary differential equations we get from Laplace’s Equation are then,
and notice that if we rewrite these a little we get,
We can now see that the second one does now look like one we’ve already solved (with a small change in letters of course, but that really doesn’t change things).
So, let’s summarize up here.
Also, we should point out that we have three of the boundary conditions homogeneous and one nonhomogeneous for a reason. When we get around to actually solving this Laplace’s Equation we’ll see that this is in fact required in order for us to find a solution.
For this problem we’ll use the product solution,
It will often be convenient to have the boundary conditions in hand that this product solution gives before we take care of the differential equation. In this case we have three homogeneous boundary conditions and so we’ll need to convert all of them. Because we’ve already converted these kind of boundary conditions we’ll leave it to you to verify that these will become,
Plugging this into the differential equation and separating gives,
Okay, now we need to decide upon a separation constant. Note that every time we’ve chosen the separation constant we did so to make sure that the differential equation
would show up. Of course, the letters might need to be different depending on how we defined our product solution (as they’ll need to be here). We know how to solve this eigenvalue/eigenfunction problem as we pointed out in the discussion after the first example. However, in order to solve it we need two boundary conditions.
So, for our problem here we can see that we’ve got two boundary conditions for but only one for and so we can see that the boundary value problem that we’ll have to solve will involve and so we need to pick a separation constant that will give use the boundary value problem we’ve already solved. In this case that means that we need to choose for the separation constant. If you’re not sure you believe that yet hold on for a second and you’ll soon see that it was in fact the correct choice here.
Putting the separation constant gives,
The two ordinary differential equations we get from Laplace’s Equation are then,
and notice that if we rewrite these a little we get,
We can now see that the second one does now look like one we’ve already solved (with a small change in letters of course, but that really doesn’t change things).
So, let’s summarize up here.
Comments
Post a Comment