Hi! I'm having trouble with an ODE. I can solve for solutions in the form \(x^2y''+\alpha y' +\beta y=0\) But now I have \((x-1)^2y''+8(x-1)y' +12 y=0\) with the solution \(y=\dfrac{c_1}{(x-1)^3}+\dfrac{c_2}{(x-1)^4}\)
I considered a substitution, but then (I probably used illegal moves, but) \(\dfrac{d^2y}{du^2}\) where \(u=x-1\) is undefined.
You're a better physicist than me Eric. Can't help here.
power series method
Haha, thanks. It's hard to compare physics knowledge! Anyway, this is mathematics!
Thank you @Loser66 , I'll look into that!
what's wrong with u = x - 1?
For series solutions, don't they need to be around a point? Can I just assume the point where \(x=0\) has a radius of convergence of \(\infty\)? The problem indicates that the solution doesn't need to work at the singular points.
nope, regular singular point is x =1 because it makes y"=0
If I use \(u=x-1\), then I can't have \(\dfrac{\text dy}{\text dx}\) and still solve it with the shortcut \(y=c_1x^{r_1}+c_2x^{r_2}\) where \(r_1\) and \(r_2\) are the roots of \(r^2+(\alpha -1) r+\beta=0\) assuming two distinct real roots?
The singular point is \(x=1\), yep. But I just need to find a solution for all \(x\neq1\).
So, I guess I can try the power series solution about \(x=0\) and suppose that it would converge for all values that aren't \(x=1\)?
\(\dfrac{\text dy}{\text du}=\dfrac{\text dy}{\text dx}\dfrac{\text dx}{\text du}\) where \(\dfrac{\text du}{\text dx}=\dfrac{\text d}{\text dx}\left(x-1\right)=1\)\(\implies\dfrac{\text dx}{\text du}=1\) I don't know if that's allowed... Either way, \(u+1=x\), so \(\dfrac{\text dx}{\text du}=1\) So then \(\dfrac{\text dy}{\text du}=\dfrac{\text dy}{\text dx}\dot\ 1=y'\) That works. But a second derivative would cause \(\dfrac{\text d^2y}{\text du}=0\), I think. I erased what I had. I'll seek a power series solution, I suppose.
Haha, just now found \((x-1)^2y''\). The next ones should be quicker.
i think you can handle from this
Thank you :)
the rest is easy, right? hehehe
Yeah! Thank you very much! I'll get to that point on my own and continue from there. When I take the derivative of the series, though, I shift the index to eliminate the term that became zero upon differentiating.
And then I shift indeces so that all \(x\) are to the \(n\) power, but, now that I think about it, that just makes more work.
Or maybe it's necessary. I can't be sure just by looking at it. But I have to much work to do for me to use my time understanding what will and won't work, unfortunately.
My prof said that if you want to make them have the same form, just convert all of the indices in a sum, for example in y", its sum is \[\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} n(n-1) a_n x^{n-2}\] if you want all indices = n, then, replace them ALL by +2 into the indices \[\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (n+2)(n+1) a_{n+2} x^{n}\] Dat sit
so that you can factor x^n out, and the leftover is a power series of coefficients
Right. That's what I do. I also do this: Assume that \(y\) is a power series solution about \(x=0\). Then \[y=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n\] and \[\dfrac{\text dy}{\text dx}=\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_nnx^{n-1}=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_{n+1}(n+1)x^{n}\] and \[\dfrac{\text d^2y}{\text dx^2}=\dfrac{\text dy}{\text dx}\left[\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_nnx^{n-1}\right]=\sum_{n=2}^\infty a_nn(n-1)x^{n-2}=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_{n+2}(n+2)(n+1)x^n\] I change the starting index according to the derivatives I've taken. But I don't think that is necessary.
Rather, I just don't know.
I didn't reach a recursive relation... I got that \(a_0\), \(a_1\), and \(a_2\) are all dependent on each other, and \(a_n=0\) for \(n\ge2\). So \(\forall n\), \(a_n=0\). Bleh...
Thank you for your help, everyone! I don't need to finish this, so maybe I'll try to tackle it later!
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!