QA 02

#$&*

course MTH 279

6/14/13 9:54pm

This document and the next are supplemented by Chapter 2 of the text. This should be submitted as a q_a_ document, filling in answers in the usual manner, between the marks

****

#$&*

The **** mark and the #$&* mark should each appear by itself, on its own line.

We show the following:

y ' + t y = 0 has solution y = e^(-t).

If y = e^(-t) then y ' = -t e^(-t) so that

y ' + t y becomes -t e^-t + t e^-t, which is zero.

y ' + sin(t) y = 0 has solution y = e^(cos t)

If y = e^(cos t) then y ' = -sin(t) e^(cos(t)) so that

y ' + t y becomes -sin(t) e^(cos(t)) + sin(t) e^cos(t) = 0

y ' + t^2 y = 0 has solution y = e^(-t^3 / 3)

This is left to you.

****

y = e^ (-t^3 / 3) then y' = -t^2 e^(-t^3 / 3)

y' + t^2 y = 0 becomes -t^2 e^(-t^3 / 3) + t^2 e^(-t^3 / 3) = 0

#$&*

What do all three solutions have in common?

Some of this is left to you.

However for one thing, note that they all involve the fact that the derivative of a function of form e^(-p(t)) is equal to -p'(t) e^(-p(t)).

And all of these equations are of the form y ' + p(t) y = 0.

Now you are asked to explain the connection.

****

They are all homogenous equations, in that they only have a single function of t, within them. This function is p(t). It can also be seen from y' + p(t)y = 0, that inorder to solve the equation we need y = e^ (-p(t)) and and that -p(t) must be equal to the antiderivative of p(t) given in the original solution

#$&*

What would be a solution to each of the following:

y ' - sqrt(t) y = 0?

If we integrate sqrt(t) we get 2/3 t^(3/2).

The derivative of e^( 2/3 t^(3/2) ) is t^(1/2) e^ ( 2/3 t^(3/2) ), or sqrt(t) e^( 2/3 t^(3/2) ).

Now, if we substitute y = sqrt(t) e^( 2/3 t^(3/2) ) into the equation, do we get a solution? If not, how can we modify our y function to obtain a solution?

****

No a solution can not be found with that substition given the conditions, instead use y = e^ (2/3 t^(3/2)) the difference between the two is there is no sqrt(t) in the function

#$&*

sqrt(t) y ' + y = 0?

The rest of our equations started with y ' . This one starts with sqrt(t) y '.

We can make it like the others if we divide both sides by sqrt(t).

We get

y ' + 1/sqrt(t) * y = 0.

Follow the process we used before.

We first integrated something. What was it we integrated?

****

sqrt(t) in the previous problem, in this problem it would be 1/sqrt(t)

#$&*

We then formed an exponential function, based on our integral. That was our y function. What y function do we get if we imitate the previous problem?

****

y = e^ (-2 * sqrt(t))

#$&*

What do we get if we plug our y function into the equation? Do we get a solution? If not, how can we modify our y function to obtain a solution?

****

-1/sqrt(t) * e^ (-2 * sqrt(t)) + 1/sqrt(t) * e^ (-2 * sqrt(t)) = 0, yes a solution can be found, y' = -1/sqrt(t) * e^ (-2 * sqrt(t))

#$&*

t y ' = y?

If we divide both sides by t and subtract the right-hand side from both sides what equation do we get?

****

y' - 1/t * y = 0

#$&*

Why would we want to have done this?

****

This gets the given problem into a common form that can be solved using known methods

#$&*

Imitating the reasoning we have seen, what is our y function?

****

y = -1/t

#$&*

Does it work?

****

yes

#$&*

y ' + p(t) y = 0 has solution y = e^(- int(p(t) dt)).

This says that you integrate the p(t) function and use it to form your solution y = e^(- int(p(t) dt)).

Does this encapsulate the method we have been using?

****

yes

#$&*

Will it always work?

****

yes?

#$&*

What do you get if you plug y = e^(-int(p(t) dt) into the equation y ' + p(t) y = 0?

****

y' + p(t) e^(-int(p(t) dt) = 0

y' = -p(t) e^(-int(p(t) dt) substitute into previous function

-p(t) e^(-int(p(t) dt) + p(t) e^(-int(p(t) dt)

#$&*

Is the equation satisfied?

****

Yes

#$&*

y ' + p(t) y = 0 is the general form of what we call a first-order linear homogeneous equation. If it can be put into this form, then it is a first-order linear homogeneous equation.

Which of the following is a homogeneous first-order linear equation?

y * y ' + sin(t) y = 0

We need y ' to have coefficient 1. We get that if we divide both sides by y.

Having done this, is our equation in the form y ' + p(t) y = 0?

****

No, it is in the form, y' + sin(t) = 0

#$&*

Is our equation therefore a homogeneous first-order linear equation?

****

No

#$&*

t * y ' + t^2 y = 0

Once more, we need y ' to have coefficient 1.

What is your conclusion?

****

Divide both sides by t, we get y' + t y = 0 therefor it is a first in correct form and is a first-order homogeneous equation

#$&*

cos(t) y ' = - sin(t) y

Again you need y ' to have coefficient 1.

Then you need the right-hand side to be 0.

Put the equation into this form, then see what you think.

****

y' + tan(t) y = 0, yes it is a first-order homogeneous equation

#$&*

y ' + t y^2 = 0

What do you think?

****

No

#$&*

y ' + y = t

How about this one?

****

No, this is a non-homogeneous

#$&*

@&

Your 'yes' and 'no' answers are correct and I'm confident from your other answer that you know why, but you do need to at least briefly justify your choices.

*@

Solve the equations above that are homogeneous first-order linear equations.

****

t * y ' + t^2 y = 0

y' + t y = 0

y = e^ (-int(t dt)

= e^ (- t^2/ 2) substitute back into the original

y' + t e^ (- t^2/ 2) = 0 y' can be found by subtracting the right hand side of the equation from both sides

-t e^ (- t^2/ 2) + t e^(- t^2/ 2) = 0

cos(t) y ' = - sin(t) y all steps are exactly like the ones above

y' + tan(t) y = 0

y = e^ (- int(tan(t) dt)

= e^ (- sec^2(x))

y' + tan(t) e^ (- sec^2(x)) = 0

-tan(t) e^ (- sec^2(x)) + tan(t) e^ (- sec^2(x)) = 0

#$&*

Verify the following:

If you multiply both sides of the equation y ' + t y by e^(t^2 / 2), the result is the derivative with respect to t of e^(t^2 / 2) * y.

The derivative with respect to t of e^(t^2 / 2) * y is easily found by the product rule to be

(e^(t^2 / 2) * y) '

= (e ^ (t^2 / 2) ) ' y + e^(t^2/2) * y '

= t e^(t^2/2) * y + e^(t^2 / 2) * y '.

If you multiply both sides of y ' + t y by e^(t^2 / 2) you get e^(t^2 / 2) y ' + t e^(t^2 / 2).

Same thing.

Now, what is it in the original expression y ' + t y that led us to come up with t^2 / 2 to put into that exponent?

****

the ' t ' multiplier on ' y '

#$&*

If you multiply the expression y ' + cos(t) y by e^(sin(t) ), the result is the derivative with respect to t of e^(-sin(t)) * y.

Just do what it says. Find the t derivative of e^(sin(t) ) * y. Then multiply both sides of the expression y ' + cos(t) y by e^(sin(t) * y).

****

e^(sin(t)) y' + cos(t) e^(sin(t)) * y

(e^(sin(t)) * y)'

= (e^(sin(t))' y + e^(sin(t)) * y'

= cos(t) e^(sin(t)) * y + e^(sin(t)) *y'

e^(sin(t)) y' + cos(t) e^(sin(t))

#$&*

How did we get e^(sin(t)) from of the expression y ' + cos(t) y? Where did that sin(t) come from?

****

cos(t) which is p(t), using the equation e^(-int(p(t) dt)

#$&*

If you multiply both sides of the equation y ' + t y = t by e^(t^2 / 2), the integral with respect to t of the left-hand side will be e^(t^2 / 2) * y.

You should have the pattern by now. What do you get, and how did we get t^2 / 2 from the expression y ' + t y = t in the first place?

****

e^(t^2 / 2) y ' + t e^(t^2 / 2) y = t e^(t^2 / 2)

we get t^2 / 2 from t that multiplies the y, using the eqaution e^(- int(p(t) dt)

#$&*

The equation becomes e^(t^2 / 2) * y ' + t e^(t^2 / 2) y = t e^(t^2 / 2).

The left-hand side, as we can easily see, is the derivative with respect to t of e^(t^2 / 2) * y.

So if we integrate the left-hand side with respect to t, since the left-hand side is the derivative of e^(t^2 / 2) * y, an antiderivative is e^(t^2 / 2) * y.

Explain why it's so.

****

well if we use, e^(t^2 / 2) * y, to get the left hand side which is just the derivative. It is mathematically possible to use the left hand side and integrate to return back to e^(t^2 / 2) * y, making it an anti-derivative

#$&*

Having integrated the left-hand side, we integrate the right-hand side t e^(t^2 / 2).

What do you get? Be sure to include an integration constant.

****

e^(t^2/ 2) + c

#$&*

Set the results of the two integrations equal and solve for y. What is your result?

****

e^(t^2/ 2) * y = e^(t^2/ 2) + c

y = 1 + c/ e^(t^2/ 2)

#$&*

Is it a solution to the original equation?

****

yes it is

#$&*

If you multiply both sides of the equation y ' + p(t) y = g(t) by the e raised to the t integral of p(t), the left-hand side becomes the derivative with respect to t of e^(integral(p(t) dt) ) * y.

See if you can prove this.

****

e^(int(p(t) dt) y' + p(t) e^(int(p(t) dt) y = g(t) e^(int(p(t) dt)) shouldn't the integral have a negative sign in front of it???

@&

You need the negative sign for a first-order homogeneus.

For the integrating factor you don't need the negative sign.

If you think about this for a minute you'll see why. Having seen why you'll never need to remember which way it is, you'll be able to figure it out on the fly.

*@

e^(int(p(t) dt) y = int(g(t) e^(int(p(t) dt) dt)

take integral of both sides and then solve for y

#$&*

"

@&

You appear to be in excellent shape here.

Do, however, check my inserted notes. Let me know if you have questions.

*@