Show that the function is a solution of the equation

  • MHB
  • Thread starter evinda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Function
In summary, the conversation discusses finding a solution to the equation $\Delta v - v_t = 0$ by using the solutions $v_i(t,x_i)$ of the equations $v_{i x_i x_i} - v_{it} = 0$. The participants also discuss the use of $\Delta v$ and $\nabla v$ in the solution. Finally, they determine that the solution is given by $\Delta v - v_t = 0$ with the $x_n$ indices placed lower.
  • #1
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
3,836
0
Hello! (Wave)

I want to show that if $v_i(t,x_i), i=1, \dots, n$ are solutions of the equations $v_{i x_i x_i} -v_{it}=0, i=1, \dots,n$ respectively, then $v=v_1 v_2 \cdots v_n(v=v(t,x))$ is a solution of $\Delta v-v_t=0$.

That's what I have done so far.

$$v_x=(v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_n)+(v_1 v_{2x} \cdots v_n)+ \dots+ (v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{nx})$$

$$v_{xx}=(v_{1xx} v_2 \cdots v_n+ v_{1x} v_{2x} \cdots v_{n}+ \dots+ v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_{nx})+ \dots+ (v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_{nx}+ \dots+ v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{nxx} )$$

So do we have to include now at $v_{xx}$ the sum $\sum_{i=1}^n v_{i x_i x_i}$?

How can we use the fact that $v_{i x_i x_i} -v_{it}=0, i=1, \dots,n$ ? (Thinking)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
evinda said:
Hello! (Wave)

I want to show that if $v_i(t,x_i), i=1, \dots, n$ are solutions of the equations $v_{i x_i x_i} -v_{it}=0, i=1, \dots,n$ respectively, then $v=v_1 v_2 \cdots v_n(v=v(t,x))$ is a solution of $\Delta v-v_t=0$.

That's what I have done so far.

$$v_x=(v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_n)+(v_1 v_{2x} \cdots v_n)+ \dots+ (v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{nx})$$

$$v_{xx}=(v_{1xx} v_2 \cdots v_n+ v_{1x} v_{2x} \cdots v_{n}+ \dots+ v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_{nx})+ \dots+ (v_{1x} v_2 \cdots v_{nx}+ \dots+ v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{nxx} )$$

So do we have to include now at $v_{xx}$ the sum $\sum_{i=1}^n v_{i x_i x_i}$?

How can we use the fact that $v_{i x_i x_i} -v_{it}=0, i=1, \dots,n$ ? (Thinking)

Hey evinda! (Smile)

I think we have:
$$v(t,\mathbf x) = v(t, x_1, x_2, ..., x_n) = v_1(t, x_1)v_2(t,x_2)...v_n(t,x_n)$$
So:
$$v_{x_1} = v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n$$
And:
$$\nabla v = v_{\mathbf x} = (v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})$$

What would $\Delta v$ be? (Wondering)
 
  • #3
I like Serena said:
Hey evinda! (Smile)

I think we have:
$$v(t,\mathbf x) = v(t, x_1, x_2, ..., x_n) = v_1(t, x_1)v_2(t,x_2)...v_n(t,x_n)$$
So:
$$v_{x_1} = v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n$$
And:
$$\nabla v = v_{\mathbf x} = (v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})$$

What would $\Delta v$ be? (Wondering)

A ok... $\Delta v$ is equal to $\nabla v \cdot \nabla v$, right?

So does it hold that $\Delta v=(v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n+v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n+ v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n}+v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})=(2v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad 2v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad 2v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})$

? (Thinking)
 
  • #4
evinda said:
$\Delta v$ is equal to $\nabla v \cdot \nabla v$, right?

So does it hold that $\Delta v=(v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n+v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n+ v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n}+v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})=(2v_{1,x_1}v_2...v_n,\quad 2v_1v_{2,x_2}...v_n,\quad ...,\quad 2v_1v_2...v_{n,x_n})$

? (Thinking)

Not quite. $\Delta v = \nabla \cdot \nabla v$.
That is:
$$\nabla v = (v_{x_1}, ..., v_{x_n}) \\
\Delta v = \nabla \cdot \nabla v = v_{x_1x_1} + ... + v_{x_nx_n}
$$

We can think of $\nabla$ as:
$$\nabla = (\pd {}{x_1},\quad \pd {}{x_2},\quad ...,\quad \pd {}{x_n})$$
(Thinking)
 
  • #5
So in our case we have $$\Delta v= v_{1 x_1, x_1} v_2 \cdots v_n+ v_1 v_{2 x_2,x_2} \cdots v_n+ \dots+ v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{n x_n x_n}$$

Right? (Thinking)
 
  • #6
evinda said:
So in our case we have $$\Delta v= v_{1 x_1, x_1} v_2 \cdots v_n+ v_1 v_{2 x_2,x_2} \cdots v_n+ \dots+ v_1 v_2 \cdots v_{n x_n x_n}$$

Right?

Yep. (Nod)
 
  • #7
Nice... And then we have that

$$\Delta v-v_t=(v_{1 x_1 x_1}-v_{1,t}) v_2 \cdots v_n+ \dots+ (v_{nx_n x_n}-v_{n,t}) v_1 \cdots v_{n-1}=0$$

Right?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
If we put the $x_n$ indices lower, yes. (Wink)
 
  • #9
I like Serena said:
If we put the $x_n$ indices lower, yes. (Wink)

You are right, I edited my post... (Smirk) Thank you! (Happy)
 

FAQ: Show that the function is a solution of the equation

How can I tell if a function is a solution of an equation?

To determine if a function is a solution of an equation, you can plug the function into the equation and see if it satisfies the equation. This means that the function's output, when substituted for the variable in the equation, should make the equation true.

What does it mean for a function to be a solution of an equation?

A function is considered a solution of an equation if when you plug the function's output in for the variable in the equation, the equation is satisfied or made true. This means that the equation holds when the function is substituted in.

Can a function be a solution to more than one equation?

Yes, a function can be a solution to more than one equation. If the function satisfies multiple equations, then it is considered a solution for each of those equations.

How is a solution to an equation different from a root of an equation?

A solution to an equation is a value or function that satisfies the equation when substituted in for the variable. A root of an equation is a value that makes the equation equal to zero when substituted in for the variable. A root can also be considered a solution, but not all solutions are roots.

Why is it important to show that a function is a solution of an equation?

It is important to show that a function is a solution of an equation because it confirms that the function is a valid solution and satisfies the equation. This is especially important in scientific and mathematical contexts, as it allows us to verify that our calculations and models are accurate and reliable.

Back
Top