Solution Check to a Partial Differential Equation

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I have the following partial differential equation (where $u = u(x,t)$)



$$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + f fracpartial upartial x = 0$$



I was given that the solution for $u$ is any differentiable function $h$ of the argument



$$t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha$$



i.e



$$u(x,t) = h left( t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha right)$$



To get this solution, I assumed that the solution was on the form $u = h(t + g(x))$ and sought out to find $g(x)$.



I substituted the form of the solution into the partial differential equation which resulted in (this is the step I am unsure with)



beginalign
a(x) + f fracpartial gpartial x &= 0 \
implies fracpartial gpartial x &= frac-a(x)f \
implies g(x) &= int_0^xfrac-a(alpha)f dalpha
endalign



Hence, my solution matches the given solution.



However, I am unsure if this working out is, in fact, correct. Also, we were given an initial condition $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t=0$. I, however, hade a change of variable to $u$, defining $u$ as



$$u(x,t) = Klog(fracC(x,t)K)$$,



where $K$ is just a constant.



Applying the initial condition given for $C(x,t)$ to $u$ yields $u(x,0) = -infty$.



I did not use this initial condition when finding my solution, though I have a feeling that it plays a fundamental part in the solution.



Thanks for the help.







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
    – JJacquelin
    Aug 23 at 4:36






  • 1




    The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
    – Mattos
    Aug 23 at 6:01











  • Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
    – JasKa071
    Aug 23 at 7:28














up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I have the following partial differential equation (where $u = u(x,t)$)



$$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + f fracpartial upartial x = 0$$



I was given that the solution for $u$ is any differentiable function $h$ of the argument



$$t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha$$



i.e



$$u(x,t) = h left( t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha right)$$



To get this solution, I assumed that the solution was on the form $u = h(t + g(x))$ and sought out to find $g(x)$.



I substituted the form of the solution into the partial differential equation which resulted in (this is the step I am unsure with)



beginalign
a(x) + f fracpartial gpartial x &= 0 \
implies fracpartial gpartial x &= frac-a(x)f \
implies g(x) &= int_0^xfrac-a(alpha)f dalpha
endalign



Hence, my solution matches the given solution.



However, I am unsure if this working out is, in fact, correct. Also, we were given an initial condition $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t=0$. I, however, hade a change of variable to $u$, defining $u$ as



$$u(x,t) = Klog(fracC(x,t)K)$$,



where $K$ is just a constant.



Applying the initial condition given for $C(x,t)$ to $u$ yields $u(x,0) = -infty$.



I did not use this initial condition when finding my solution, though I have a feeling that it plays a fundamental part in the solution.



Thanks for the help.







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
    – JJacquelin
    Aug 23 at 4:36






  • 1




    The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
    – Mattos
    Aug 23 at 6:01











  • Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
    – JasKa071
    Aug 23 at 7:28












up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I have the following partial differential equation (where $u = u(x,t)$)



$$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + f fracpartial upartial x = 0$$



I was given that the solution for $u$ is any differentiable function $h$ of the argument



$$t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha$$



i.e



$$u(x,t) = h left( t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha right)$$



To get this solution, I assumed that the solution was on the form $u = h(t + g(x))$ and sought out to find $g(x)$.



I substituted the form of the solution into the partial differential equation which resulted in (this is the step I am unsure with)



beginalign
a(x) + f fracpartial gpartial x &= 0 \
implies fracpartial gpartial x &= frac-a(x)f \
implies g(x) &= int_0^xfrac-a(alpha)f dalpha
endalign



Hence, my solution matches the given solution.



However, I am unsure if this working out is, in fact, correct. Also, we were given an initial condition $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t=0$. I, however, hade a change of variable to $u$, defining $u$ as



$$u(x,t) = Klog(fracC(x,t)K)$$,



where $K$ is just a constant.



Applying the initial condition given for $C(x,t)$ to $u$ yields $u(x,0) = -infty$.



I did not use this initial condition when finding my solution, though I have a feeling that it plays a fundamental part in the solution.



Thanks for the help.







share|cite|improve this question














I have the following partial differential equation (where $u = u(x,t)$)



$$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + f fracpartial upartial x = 0$$



I was given that the solution for $u$ is any differentiable function $h$ of the argument



$$t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha$$



i.e



$$u(x,t) = h left( t - frac1fint_0 ^x a(alpha) dalpha right)$$



To get this solution, I assumed that the solution was on the form $u = h(t + g(x))$ and sought out to find $g(x)$.



I substituted the form of the solution into the partial differential equation which resulted in (this is the step I am unsure with)



beginalign
a(x) + f fracpartial gpartial x &= 0 \
implies fracpartial gpartial x &= frac-a(x)f \
implies g(x) &= int_0^xfrac-a(alpha)f dalpha
endalign



Hence, my solution matches the given solution.



However, I am unsure if this working out is, in fact, correct. Also, we were given an initial condition $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t=0$. I, however, hade a change of variable to $u$, defining $u$ as



$$u(x,t) = Klog(fracC(x,t)K)$$,



where $K$ is just a constant.



Applying the initial condition given for $C(x,t)$ to $u$ yields $u(x,0) = -infty$.



I did not use this initial condition when finding my solution, though I have a feeling that it plays a fundamental part in the solution.



Thanks for the help.









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 23 at 7:26

























asked Aug 23 at 3:49









JasKa071

112




112







  • 1




    Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
    – JJacquelin
    Aug 23 at 4:36






  • 1




    The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
    – Mattos
    Aug 23 at 6:01











  • Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
    – JasKa071
    Aug 23 at 7:28












  • 1




    Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
    – JJacquelin
    Aug 23 at 4:36






  • 1




    The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
    – Mattos
    Aug 23 at 6:01











  • Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
    – JasKa071
    Aug 23 at 7:28







1




1




Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
– JJacquelin
Aug 23 at 4:36




Why the same symbol $f$ has two different meaning in your question? A first $f$ appears as a coefficient in your equation $a(x) fracpartial u(x,t)partial t$ + $f fracpartial u(x,t)partial x$ = $0$ . A second $f$ appears as a function in $u=f(t+g(x))$. Please, re-edit your question to avoid ambiguity.
– JJacquelin
Aug 23 at 4:36




1




1




The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
– Mattos
Aug 23 at 6:01





The result and working out is fine. You could also have just differentiated the solution given using the chain rule i.e beginalign u &= h(t - int a(x)/f dx) \ therefore u_t &= h' cdot 1 \ therefore u_x &= h' cdot -a/f \ implies au_t + fu_x &= a cdot h' + f cdot h' cdot -a/f \ &= 0endalign As for the second part of your question, I have no idea what you mean by the initial condition is $C(x,t) = 0$ at $t = 0$. Do you mean $u(x,0) = 0$? And where did $u=Klog(C/K)$ come from? What is $K$? You'll need to explain the last part of your question much more more clearly,
– Mattos
Aug 23 at 6:01













Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
– JasKa071
Aug 23 at 7:28




Thanks, I managed to edit the original question so it is a bit more clear.
– JasKa071
Aug 23 at 7:28










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













Consider the more general problem of this PDE !
$$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + b(t) fracpartial upartial x = 0$$
Your problem is the particular case of $b(t)=$constant.
$$ fracpartial ub(t)partial t + fracpartial ua(x)partial x = 0$$
Change of variables :
$begincases
X=int a(x)dx \
T=int b(t)dt
endcases$
$$ fracpartial upartial T + fracpartial upartial X = 0$$
It is well known and elementary to prove that the general solution is :
$$u(X,T)=F(X-T)$$
where $F$ is an arbitrary function.



Coming back to the original variables :
$$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -int b(t)dt right)$$
In the case of $b(t)=f=$constant :
$$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -f:t right)$$
Since $F$ is an arbitrary function they are an infinity of equivalent forms to express the general solution, for example :



$u(x,t)=Gleft(-frac1fint a(x)dx +:t right)quad$ with $G$ an arbitrary function.



or



$u(x,t)=Hleft(c_1frac1fint a(x)dx -c_1:t +c_0right)quad$ with $H$ an arbitrary function.



Or many other equivalent forms.



Note that the arbitrary coefficient of $int a(x)dx$ and $-f:t$ must be the same : $Hleft(c_1int a(x)dx -c_2f:t +c_0right)$ is not solution of the PDE if $c_1neq c_2$.






share|cite|improve this answer






















    Your Answer




    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2891677%2fsolution-check-to-a-partial-differential-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Consider the more general problem of this PDE !
    $$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + b(t) fracpartial upartial x = 0$$
    Your problem is the particular case of $b(t)=$constant.
    $$ fracpartial ub(t)partial t + fracpartial ua(x)partial x = 0$$
    Change of variables :
    $begincases
    X=int a(x)dx \
    T=int b(t)dt
    endcases$
    $$ fracpartial upartial T + fracpartial upartial X = 0$$
    It is well known and elementary to prove that the general solution is :
    $$u(X,T)=F(X-T)$$
    where $F$ is an arbitrary function.



    Coming back to the original variables :
    $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -int b(t)dt right)$$
    In the case of $b(t)=f=$constant :
    $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -f:t right)$$
    Since $F$ is an arbitrary function they are an infinity of equivalent forms to express the general solution, for example :



    $u(x,t)=Gleft(-frac1fint a(x)dx +:t right)quad$ with $G$ an arbitrary function.



    or



    $u(x,t)=Hleft(c_1frac1fint a(x)dx -c_1:t +c_0right)quad$ with $H$ an arbitrary function.



    Or many other equivalent forms.



    Note that the arbitrary coefficient of $int a(x)dx$ and $-f:t$ must be the same : $Hleft(c_1int a(x)dx -c_2f:t +c_0right)$ is not solution of the PDE if $c_1neq c_2$.






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Consider the more general problem of this PDE !
      $$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + b(t) fracpartial upartial x = 0$$
      Your problem is the particular case of $b(t)=$constant.
      $$ fracpartial ub(t)partial t + fracpartial ua(x)partial x = 0$$
      Change of variables :
      $begincases
      X=int a(x)dx \
      T=int b(t)dt
      endcases$
      $$ fracpartial upartial T + fracpartial upartial X = 0$$
      It is well known and elementary to prove that the general solution is :
      $$u(X,T)=F(X-T)$$
      where $F$ is an arbitrary function.



      Coming back to the original variables :
      $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -int b(t)dt right)$$
      In the case of $b(t)=f=$constant :
      $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -f:t right)$$
      Since $F$ is an arbitrary function they are an infinity of equivalent forms to express the general solution, for example :



      $u(x,t)=Gleft(-frac1fint a(x)dx +:t right)quad$ with $G$ an arbitrary function.



      or



      $u(x,t)=Hleft(c_1frac1fint a(x)dx -c_1:t +c_0right)quad$ with $H$ an arbitrary function.



      Or many other equivalent forms.



      Note that the arbitrary coefficient of $int a(x)dx$ and $-f:t$ must be the same : $Hleft(c_1int a(x)dx -c_2f:t +c_0right)$ is not solution of the PDE if $c_1neq c_2$.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote









        Consider the more general problem of this PDE !
        $$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + b(t) fracpartial upartial x = 0$$
        Your problem is the particular case of $b(t)=$constant.
        $$ fracpartial ub(t)partial t + fracpartial ua(x)partial x = 0$$
        Change of variables :
        $begincases
        X=int a(x)dx \
        T=int b(t)dt
        endcases$
        $$ fracpartial upartial T + fracpartial upartial X = 0$$
        It is well known and elementary to prove that the general solution is :
        $$u(X,T)=F(X-T)$$
        where $F$ is an arbitrary function.



        Coming back to the original variables :
        $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -int b(t)dt right)$$
        In the case of $b(t)=f=$constant :
        $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -f:t right)$$
        Since $F$ is an arbitrary function they are an infinity of equivalent forms to express the general solution, for example :



        $u(x,t)=Gleft(-frac1fint a(x)dx +:t right)quad$ with $G$ an arbitrary function.



        or



        $u(x,t)=Hleft(c_1frac1fint a(x)dx -c_1:t +c_0right)quad$ with $H$ an arbitrary function.



        Or many other equivalent forms.



        Note that the arbitrary coefficient of $int a(x)dx$ and $-f:t$ must be the same : $Hleft(c_1int a(x)dx -c_2f:t +c_0right)$ is not solution of the PDE if $c_1neq c_2$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        Consider the more general problem of this PDE !
        $$a(x) fracpartial upartial t + b(t) fracpartial upartial x = 0$$
        Your problem is the particular case of $b(t)=$constant.
        $$ fracpartial ub(t)partial t + fracpartial ua(x)partial x = 0$$
        Change of variables :
        $begincases
        X=int a(x)dx \
        T=int b(t)dt
        endcases$
        $$ fracpartial upartial T + fracpartial upartial X = 0$$
        It is well known and elementary to prove that the general solution is :
        $$u(X,T)=F(X-T)$$
        where $F$ is an arbitrary function.



        Coming back to the original variables :
        $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -int b(t)dt right)$$
        In the case of $b(t)=f=$constant :
        $$u(x,t)=Fleft(int a(x)dx -f:t right)$$
        Since $F$ is an arbitrary function they are an infinity of equivalent forms to express the general solution, for example :



        $u(x,t)=Gleft(-frac1fint a(x)dx +:t right)quad$ with $G$ an arbitrary function.



        or



        $u(x,t)=Hleft(c_1frac1fint a(x)dx -c_1:t +c_0right)quad$ with $H$ an arbitrary function.



        Or many other equivalent forms.



        Note that the arbitrary coefficient of $int a(x)dx$ and $-f:t$ must be the same : $Hleft(c_1int a(x)dx -c_2f:t +c_0right)$ is not solution of the PDE if $c_1neq c_2$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Aug 27 at 6:45

























        answered Aug 23 at 12:28









        JJacquelin

        40.6k21650




        40.6k21650



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2891677%2fsolution-check-to-a-partial-differential-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

            Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

            Carbon dioxide