My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > College Math Forum > Differential Equations

Differential Equations Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations Math Forum


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
June 14th, 2017, 09:35 AM   #1
Math Team
 
MATHEMATICIAN's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: काठमाडौं, नेपाल

Posts: 831
Thanks: 60

Math Focus: सामान्य गणित
Differential equation proof

Someone please prove this.
I got exam tomorrow!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20170614_230209.jpg (104.7 KB, 20 views)
MATHEMATICIAN is offline  
 
June 14th, 2017, 10:37 AM   #2
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 17,919
Thanks: 1383

$\displaystyle \frac{\partial z}{\partial r} = \frac{∂z}{∂x}\cdot\frac{\partial x}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial z}{\partial y}\cdot\frac{\partial y}{\partial r} = 2r\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} + 2s\frac{\partial z}{\partial y}$, etc.
skipjack is offline  
June 14th, 2017, 10:40 AM   #3
Math Team
 
MATHEMATICIAN's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: काठमाडौं, नेपाल

Posts: 831
Thanks: 60

Math Focus: सामान्य गणित
I know those rules but still can't prove.
Could you give me some hint/help.

Last edited by skipjack; June 14th, 2017 at 11:30 AM.
MATHEMATICIAN is offline  
June 14th, 2017, 11:31 AM   #4
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 17,919
Thanks: 1383

You'll also need to use the product rule. Can you post your attempt?
skipjack is offline  
June 14th, 2017, 11:51 AM   #5
Math Team
 
MATHEMATICIAN's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: काठमाडौं, नेपाल

Posts: 831
Thanks: 60

Math Focus: सामान्य गणित
The solution for second order partial derivative I got:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20170615_011932.jpg (96.1 KB, 5 views)
File Type: jpg 20170615_011921.jpg (95.8 KB, 4 views)

Last edited by skipjack; June 14th, 2017 at 09:41 PM.
MATHEMATICIAN is offline  
June 14th, 2017, 02:35 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2016
From: Australia

Posts: 177
Thanks: 22

Math Focus: horses,cash me outside how bow dah, trash doves
The very first thing I would be trying is what is the implied solution under the additional assumption imposed by making the substitution f(x,y)= u(x,y)+v(x,y)*I into the pde.

And then furthermore whether there are any initial values that can be dictated for u and v on (x,y).

But, don't pursue with any guarantee of the line of enquiry bearing fruit; I'm pretty sporadic with what pops into my head first.

Last edited by skipjack; June 14th, 2017 at 10:46 PM.
Adam Ledger is offline  
June 14th, 2017, 10:39 PM   #7
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 17,919
Thanks: 1383

You started off correctly, MATHEMATICIAN.

As $z$ has continuous second-order partial derivatives, $\displaystyle \frac{\partial^2 z}{\partial x\partial y} = \frac{\partial^2 z}{\partial y\partial x}$.

You went wrong towards the end, but you didn't show every detail, making it difficult for me to say what exactly you did that wasn't right.

For example, you correctly obtain $\displaystyle 2\frac{\partial z}{\partial x}$, but this appears twice in your final line for no apparent reason.

$\displaystyle \frac{\partial z}{\partial r} = 2r\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} + 2s\frac{\partial z}{\partial y}$
$\displaystyle \begin{align*}\partial^2z/\partial r^2 &= 2\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} + 2r\!\left(\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x^2}\cdot\frac{\partial x}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x\partial y}\cdot\frac{\partial y}{\partial r}\right) + 2s\!\left(\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial y\partial x}\cdot\frac{\partial x}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial^2z}{\partial y^2}\cdot\frac{\partial y}{\partial r}\right) \\
&= 2\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} + 2r\!\left(2r\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x^2} + 2s\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x\partial y}\right) + 2s\!\left(2r\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial y\partial x} + 2s\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial y^2}\right) \\
&= 4r^2\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x^2} + 2\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} + 8rs\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial x\partial y} + 4s^2\frac{\partial^2z}{\partial y^2}\end{align*}$
skipjack is offline  
June 15th, 2017, 03:38 AM   #8
Math Team
 
MATHEMATICIAN's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: काठमाडौं, नेपाल

Posts: 831
Thanks: 60

Math Focus: सामान्य गणित
Are you not using product rule in your second time differentiation?
Could you please explain what you are doing.
MATHEMATICIAN is offline  
June 15th, 2017, 04:57 AM   #9
Math Team
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: Alabama

Posts: 2,647
Thanks: 680

Your reference to "second time differentiation" confused me because, at first, I thought you meant a second differentiation with respect to a "time" variable- but there is no such variable!

In fact, I think you mean just "differentiating the second time", taking the second derivative with respect to r.

skipjack does use the product rule when he differentiates and gets , the coefficient for the first term being "2" because, of course, the derivative of "2r" with respect to r, is "2".

But the second derivative with respect to r of the second term, has only one part because "2s" is independent of r (or, equivalently, the derivative of "2s" with respect to r, is 0).
Country Boy is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > College Math Forum > Differential Equations

Tags
differential, equation, proof



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Differential equation help aletex Calculus 6 December 11th, 2015 07:16 PM
Gompertz equation - differential equation Sonprelis Calculus 6 August 6th, 2014 10:07 AM
Show that an equation satisfies a differential equation PhizKid Differential Equations 0 February 24th, 2013 10:30 AM
Help with differential equations proof! eric3353 Differential Equations 4 May 29th, 2008 04:46 AM
Help with differential equations proof! eric3353 Differential Equations 2 May 28th, 2008 03:06 PM





Copyright © 2017 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.