MHB Solving a Boundary Value Problem: Non-Uniform vs. Uniform Partitioning

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a boundary value problem using finite difference methods, specifically comparing non-uniform and uniform partitioning. The problem is defined by a second-order differential equation with boundary conditions at x=0 and x=1. An exact solution is derived through substitution, leading to a first-order linear differential equation. The exact solution is expressed as a function of x, incorporating constants determined by the boundary conditions. This exact solution can be utilized to evaluate the accuracy of numerical methods based on different partitioning strategies.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)Consider the boundary value problem
$\left\{\begin{matrix}
- \epsilon u''+u'=1 &, x \in [0,1] \\
u(0)=u(1)=0 &
\end{matrix}\right.$
where $\epsilon$ is a positive given constant.
I have to express a finite difference method for its numerical solution.
How can we know whether it is better to use non-uniform partition or uniform partition?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, you can always do the experiment and see. This BVP has an exact answer that's not too difficult to obtain. If you do the substitution $v=u'$, you get a first-order linear DE, $v'-v/\varepsilon=-1/\varepsilon$, with solution
$$v=1+C_1 e^{x/\varepsilon}.$$
Integrating once yields
$$u=x+\varepsilon C_1 e^{x/\varepsilon}+C_2.$$
Applying the boundary conditions yields the system
\begin{align*}
\varepsilon C_1+C_2&=0 \\
\varepsilon C_1 e^{1/\varepsilon}+C_2&=-1,
\end{align*}
with solution
\begin{align*}
C_1&=\frac{1}{\varepsilon(1-e^{1/\varepsilon})} \\
C_2&=\frac{1}{e^{1/\varepsilon}-1}.
\end{align*}
Hence, the exact solution is
$$u(x)=x+\frac{e^{x/\varepsilon}-1}{1-e^{1/\varepsilon}}.$$
You can use this to compare how good the two numerical solutions are.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top