Solution to diffusion equation in 1d spherical polar coordinates

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving the steady-state diffusion equation in 1D spherical polar coordinates, specifically the equation D.1/(r^2)∂/∂r(r^2∂c/∂r)=0. The solution is identified as c(r) = A + B/r, where A and B are constants, but the original poster struggles with the derivation. Key points include that r^2∂c/∂r must be independent of r, leading to the conclusion that ∂c/∂r = -B/r^2, which simplifies the equation. The presence of the D term is clarified as a reference to the exercise number, and it is noted that the 1/r^2 factor can be ignored when solving since it implies that the expression it multiplies must equal zero. Understanding these relationships is crucial for successfully solving the diffusion equation.
captainst1985
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Ok,

I have been given the steady state diffusion equation in 1d spherical polar coordinates as;

D.1/(r^2).'partial'd/dr(r^2.'partial'dc/dr)=0

I know that the solution comes in the form c(r) = A+B/r where A and B are some constants. I just don't know how to get from here to there. I have tried doing differentiation by parts on the equation then integrating the result, with no success. I can form a second order differential equation of the form;

r^2.'partial'd2c/dr2 +2r'partial'dc/dr = 0

but again don't know where to go from here. Any help greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
captainst1985 said:
D.1/(r^2).'partial'd/dr(r^2.'partial'dc/dr)=0

Hi captainst1985! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(btw, if you type alt-d, it prints ∂)

I don't understand what the D is at the beginning of the line. :confused:

If I ignore that, the equation says ∂/∂r(r^2.∂c/∂r) = 0;

so r^2.∂c/∂r must be independent of r (-B, say);

so ∂c/∂r = -B/r^2;

so c = A + B/r.
 
Hi,

Can you explain why one would say that:

so r^2.∂c/∂r must be independent of r (-B, say)?

Why would you equate r^2.∂c/∂r to be -B? What is the basis for this and/or the technique that does this called? I've gotten a little forgetful on some of these techniques...

The OP also had the multiplier on the front end that is effectively:

D/r^2

How does that come into play when solving?

Thanks!
 
Welcome to PF!

Hi JHZR2! Welcome to PF! :wink:
JHZR2 said:
Hi,

Can you explain why one would say that:

so r^2.∂c/∂r must be independent of r (-B, say)?

Because ∂/∂r of that is 0, ie (in words) the derivative of that with respect to r is 0, so changing r doesn't change it, ie it must be independent of r. :smile:
The OP also had the multiplier on the front end that is effectively:

D/r^2

How does that come into play when solving?

Because if 1/r2 times something is 0, then the something must also be 0, so we can ignore the 1/r2 ! :wink:

(The D probably just indicates that it's the fourth exercise in the homework … A. B. C. D. …)

(btw, typing "alt-d" for "∂" only works on a Mac :redface:)
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top