Suppose that L(y)= ...
\[L \left[ y \right] = (x ^{2}+1)y \prime \prime-2xy \prime+2y = (x ^{2}+1)^{2}\] and \[y _{1}= x ^{2}+1\],\[y _{2} = x\] are solutions of L[y] = 0. Find the general solution of \[L \left[ y \right] = (x^{2}+1)^{2}\] on the interval .
interval \[\left| x \right|<1\]
is L a Laplace transform?
No.
then youll have to define it for me. The only other time Ive seen it would be as a linear operator then
yes, that would be it.
hmmm, so it looks like y = y1 + y2 + y3 + ... is what it is refereing to
yes.
variation of parameters?
quite possibly, using a wronskian perhaps?
i know the long version, and the short version ....
that too.
the short version involve the theorem?
lol, i never recall thrms. The wronskian is a determinant of derivatives i beleve
yup
let me know the short version for now.
\[\begin{vmatrix}W_x&W&W_y\\ y_1&0&y_2\\ y'_1&g(x)&y'_2\\ \end{vmatrix}\]
this actually ends up being the cramer rule for a solution of 2 equation in 2 unknowns if we do the long version
do you know how to run a determinant on this matrix setup?
the ones i have dealt with only are 2 by 2, so not really.
this setup takes advantage of submatrixes to find Wx cover the row/column of the Wx and take the determinant of whats left: -y2 * g(x) to find Wy cover the row/column of the Wy and take the determinant of whats left: y'1 * g(x) to find W cover the row/column of the W and take the determinant of whats left: y1 y'2 - y2 y'1
it tends to be more intuitive if taken the long way first .... but im a little slow :)
i would disagree.
with the 2nd phrase.
lol
i would like to be as slow as you are hehe
could you go step by step with me. i think im really slow.
im trying to recall the rest of the setup using the wronskian i know its something to do with Wx/W and so forth
yes, its pretty tedious stuff.
Please dont hesistate to bring in other people. Thank you very much!
isnt the Wonskian this way \[ W(t)=\left[\begin{matrix}x^2+1&x\\2x&1 \end{matrix}\right] \]
i was thinking about that..
the smarter than mes tend to come in and peek about :) \[ \begin{vmatrix}W_x&W&W_y\\ x^2+1&0&x\\ 2x&(x^2+1)^2&1\\ \end{vmatrix}\] \[W_x=-x(x^2+1)^2\\ W = (x^2+1)-2x^2\\ W_y=(x^2+1)^3 \] \[\frac{W_x}{W}=\frac{-x(x^2+1)^2}{1-x^2}=\frac{-x(x^2+1)^2}{-(x^2-1)}\]
I do a setup that allows me to just run all the Ws at a glance
I see.
Thats the Cramer's Rule for solution of set of equations?
yes
\[A'x+B'y=0\\A'x+B'y=g(x)\]
you guys are too smart for me haha
I got the Qronksian down, what next?
Wronskian*
wow! a new method, the Qronskian :)
hey!
hahaha
@qrious126 this explains the same. you want to check out http://scipp.ucsc.edu/~haber/ph116C/Wronskian_12.pdf
math is the only language that advances "for" science based on old math. Other languages develop for no reasons!!
hahah
you know you can learn so much if you dont proscrastinate almost every time you're given an assignment.
the long version is ..... yp = A(x) y1 + B(x) y2 y'p = A(x) y'1 + B(x) y'2 + A'(x) y1 + B'(x) y2 ; let A'(x) y1 + B'(x) y2 = 0 for the homogenous part, giving us: y'p = A(x) y'1 + B(x) y'2 y''p = A(x) y''1 + B(x) y''2 + A'(x) y'1 + B'(x) y'2 inserting the yps into the original equation gives us A(x) y''1 (x^2+1) + B(x) y''2 (x^2+1) + A'(x) y'1 (x^2+1) + B'(x) y'2 (x^2+1) -2x A(x) y'1 - 2x B(x) y'2 +2 A(x) y1 + 2 B(x) y2 ---------------------- (x^2+1)^2 which should give us 2 equations in A' and B' to solve
thanks! appreciate your help!
@amistre64 what did I do to deserve a medal?
you helped me out with that link you posted :)
@amistre64 hmm. thanks. and welcome ^_^
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!