Solution of the parabolic equation











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












The problem is set as follows:
$$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=-frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}-frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}$$
where $varepsilon>0,, h>0$ with boundary conditions on $Omega={zin mathbb{R}^2vert z_1 leqslant a,,z_2 in mathbb{R} }$, where $a>0$:
$$W(tau,z)vert_{partial Omega}=0. $$
and initial conditions
$$W(0,z)=delta(z).$$
Is it possible to find a classical solution for that problem? The Dirac delta function for the initial condition can be substituted with some smooth enough function in order to simplify analysis. Can the solution of the stationary problem be obtained?



$textbf{Edited on November 28}$



There is a mistake in the initial system. The corrected one looks as follows:
$$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}+frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}.$$










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite












    The problem is set as follows:
    $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=-frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}-frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}$$
    where $varepsilon>0,, h>0$ with boundary conditions on $Omega={zin mathbb{R}^2vert z_1 leqslant a,,z_2 in mathbb{R} }$, where $a>0$:
    $$W(tau,z)vert_{partial Omega}=0. $$
    and initial conditions
    $$W(0,z)=delta(z).$$
    Is it possible to find a classical solution for that problem? The Dirac delta function for the initial condition can be substituted with some smooth enough function in order to simplify analysis. Can the solution of the stationary problem be obtained?



    $textbf{Edited on November 28}$



    There is a mistake in the initial system. The corrected one looks as follows:
    $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}+frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}.$$










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite











      The problem is set as follows:
      $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=-frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}-frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}$$
      where $varepsilon>0,, h>0$ with boundary conditions on $Omega={zin mathbb{R}^2vert z_1 leqslant a,,z_2 in mathbb{R} }$, where $a>0$:
      $$W(tau,z)vert_{partial Omega}=0. $$
      and initial conditions
      $$W(0,z)=delta(z).$$
      Is it possible to find a classical solution for that problem? The Dirac delta function for the initial condition can be substituted with some smooth enough function in order to simplify analysis. Can the solution of the stationary problem be obtained?



      $textbf{Edited on November 28}$



      There is a mistake in the initial system. The corrected one looks as follows:
      $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}+frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}.$$










      share|cite|improve this question















      The problem is set as follows:
      $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=-frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}-frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}$$
      where $varepsilon>0,, h>0$ with boundary conditions on $Omega={zin mathbb{R}^2vert z_1 leqslant a,,z_2 in mathbb{R} }$, where $a>0$:
      $$W(tau,z)vert_{partial Omega}=0. $$
      and initial conditions
      $$W(0,z)=delta(z).$$
      Is it possible to find a classical solution for that problem? The Dirac delta function for the initial condition can be substituted with some smooth enough function in order to simplify analysis. Can the solution of the stationary problem be obtained?



      $textbf{Edited on November 28}$



      There is a mistake in the initial system. The corrected one looks as follows:
      $$frac{partial W(tau,z)}{partial tau}=frac{1}{varepsilon} frac{partial(z_1 W(tau,z))}{partial z_1}+frac{partial(z_2 W(tau,z))}{partial z_2}+h^2frac{partial^2 W(tau,z)}{partial z_1^2}.$$







      differential-equations pde boundary-value-problem






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 28 at 15:36

























      asked Nov 24 at 0:08









      Artem Zefirov

      979




      979






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          Not a solution, just a few thoughts about a product ansatz, which the solution is most likely not of the form. If
          $$
          W(t,z_1,z_2)=w_1(t)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)
          $$

          then one obtains the three equations
          begin{align}
          left{ frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t} - c_1right} w_1(t) &= 0 \
          left{ frac{{rm d}^2}{{rm d}z_1^2} w_2(t) - frac{z_1}{h^2 epsilon} frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_1} + frac{c_2}{h^2epsilon} right} w_2(z_1) &= 0 \
          left { frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_2} + frac{epsilon c_1 + epsilon + c_2 + 1}{z_2 epsilon} right} w_3(z_2) &= 0
          end{align}

          with the solutions
          begin{align}
          w_1(t) &= C_1 , {rm e}^{c_1 t} tag{1} \
          w_2(z_1) &= C_{21} , z_1 , Mleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) + C_{22} , z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) tag{2} \
          w_3(z_2) &= C_3 , z_2^{-left(c_1 + 1 + frac{c_2+1}{epsilon}right)} tag{3}
          end{align}

          where $c_1,c_2,C_1,C_{21},C_{22},C_3$ are arbitrary constants and $M,U$ are the two Kummer solutions.



          You say that the solutions must vanish at $z_1=a, z_1=-infty$ and $z_2=pm infty$:



          If the first argument in the two Kummer solutions of $w_2(z_1)$ was a negative integer, they were polynomials of some degree and thus would not go to zero in the limit $z_1rightarrow -infty$. Thus $M$ and $U$ are not polynomials in which case we must have $C_{21}=0$ since $$M(a,b,z)sim frac{Gamma(b)}{Gamma(a)} , {rm e}^{z} , z^{a-b}$$ diverges exponentially. For the second term we have
          $$
          z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) sim |z_1|^{c_2} qquad {rm as} quad z_1 rightarrow -infty
          $$

          and so $c_2<0$. From (1) we must as well require $c_1<0$ and from (3) it follows $c_1+1+frac{c_2+1}{epsilon} > 0$ because of the boundary condition at $z_2=pm infty$.



          Turning back to $U$ however it seems we need to find zeros in order to fulfill the boundary condition at $z_1=a$. But the total number of zeros for $U(a,b,z)$ is given by $T(a,b)=T(a-b+1,2-b)$ if $bgeq 1$ which here becomes $Tleft(-frac{c_2}{2},frac{1}{2}right)=0$ since the first argument $-c_2 >0$ (cf. https://dlmf.nist.gov/13.9).



          Thus is seems there is no solution $neq 0$ with this product-ansatz, since the boundary condition at $z_1=a$ can not be fulfilled.






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
            – Artem Zefirov
            Nov 28 at 16:54


















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          It's just a drift of the solution. Using the same substitution for the correct system (each member enters with a positive sign)
          $$ W(tau,z)=w_1(tau)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)$$
          the next equations can be obtained:
          $$ begin{align*}
          frac{d w_1(tau)}{dtau}&-c_1 w_1(tau)=0\
          frac{d w_3(z_2)}{d z_2}&-frac{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}{z_2}w_3(z_2)=0\
          frac{d^2 w_2(z_1)}{d z_1^2}&+frac{z_1}{h^2 varepsilon} frac{d w_2(z_1)}{d z_1}+frac{c_2}{h^2varepsilon}w_2(z_1)=0
          end{align*}$$

          Solution for the first two equations can be presented as follows: $$
          begin{align*}
          w_1(tau)&=K_1 e^{c_1 tau}\
          w_3(z_2)&=K_3 z_2^{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}
          end{align*}
          $$

          In order to solve the third system let's consider new variables:
          $$
          x=frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}},quad a=c_2-1,quad w_2(x)=u(x)e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}
          $$

          and after substitution one can get a Weber's equation: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeberDifferentialEquations.html
          $$u''+(a+frac{1}{2}-frac{x^2}{4})u=0.$$
          It's known that parabolic cylinder functions $D_a(x)$ are solutions for this equation. They are orthogonal on the whole real space for $a in N$ (Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed., p.308):
          $$
          int_{-infty}^{infty}D_m(s)D_n(s) ds =delta_{mn}n! sqrt{2pi}
          $$

          Let's leave out for a while the problem of orthogonality of ${D_a(x)}$ for $ain R$ and $xin (-infty,frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}})$ and realize that the function
          $$
          w_{2,a}(x)=e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}D_a(x)
          $$

          is a solution for the most troublesome equation of ours. One need to find the eigenvalues ${a_k}$ such that the solution would satisfy the border condition. Thus,
          $$
          D_{a_k}left(frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)=0.
          $$

          The general solution for our initial equation can be expressed as a series:
          $$
          W(tau,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k e^{c_{1,k} tau} z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
          $$

          From the requirement of series convergence and the border condition for $z_2$ the constants $c_1,c_2$ should satisfy the next conditions:
          $$begin{align*}
          c_{1,k}&<0\
          c_{2,k}&=a_k+1\
          c_{1,k}&-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}<0
          end{align*}$$

          Coefficients $b_k$ are usually can be found from initial conditions. Let's assume that a delta function can be expanded as follows:
          $$
          W(0,z)=delta(z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty}f_k psi_k(z_1,z_2),
          $$

          where $$psi_k(z_1,z_2)=frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2) cdot d_k cdot D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right).$$ Here $frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2)-$ an orthonormal system of Hermite functions defined for $z_2in (-infty,infty)$ and $d_k -$ are normalizing coefficients for the functions $D_{a_k}(z_1)$. I wonder on what domain shall we normalize them. It depends of what domain these functions can be transformed into orthogonal functions. In case the origin domain $(-infty,a)$ is not satisfactory can we use an infinite interval $(-infty,infty)$ while expanding our initial condition into the series?



          On the other hand,
          $$
          W(0,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
          $$

          Can we use this idea in order to define coefficients $b_k$?






          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: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            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%2f3011003%2fsolution-of-the-parabolic-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Not a solution, just a few thoughts about a product ansatz, which the solution is most likely not of the form. If
            $$
            W(t,z_1,z_2)=w_1(t)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)
            $$

            then one obtains the three equations
            begin{align}
            left{ frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t} - c_1right} w_1(t) &= 0 \
            left{ frac{{rm d}^2}{{rm d}z_1^2} w_2(t) - frac{z_1}{h^2 epsilon} frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_1} + frac{c_2}{h^2epsilon} right} w_2(z_1) &= 0 \
            left { frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_2} + frac{epsilon c_1 + epsilon + c_2 + 1}{z_2 epsilon} right} w_3(z_2) &= 0
            end{align}

            with the solutions
            begin{align}
            w_1(t) &= C_1 , {rm e}^{c_1 t} tag{1} \
            w_2(z_1) &= C_{21} , z_1 , Mleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) + C_{22} , z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) tag{2} \
            w_3(z_2) &= C_3 , z_2^{-left(c_1 + 1 + frac{c_2+1}{epsilon}right)} tag{3}
            end{align}

            where $c_1,c_2,C_1,C_{21},C_{22},C_3$ are arbitrary constants and $M,U$ are the two Kummer solutions.



            You say that the solutions must vanish at $z_1=a, z_1=-infty$ and $z_2=pm infty$:



            If the first argument in the two Kummer solutions of $w_2(z_1)$ was a negative integer, they were polynomials of some degree and thus would not go to zero in the limit $z_1rightarrow -infty$. Thus $M$ and $U$ are not polynomials in which case we must have $C_{21}=0$ since $$M(a,b,z)sim frac{Gamma(b)}{Gamma(a)} , {rm e}^{z} , z^{a-b}$$ diverges exponentially. For the second term we have
            $$
            z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) sim |z_1|^{c_2} qquad {rm as} quad z_1 rightarrow -infty
            $$

            and so $c_2<0$. From (1) we must as well require $c_1<0$ and from (3) it follows $c_1+1+frac{c_2+1}{epsilon} > 0$ because of the boundary condition at $z_2=pm infty$.



            Turning back to $U$ however it seems we need to find zeros in order to fulfill the boundary condition at $z_1=a$. But the total number of zeros for $U(a,b,z)$ is given by $T(a,b)=T(a-b+1,2-b)$ if $bgeq 1$ which here becomes $Tleft(-frac{c_2}{2},frac{1}{2}right)=0$ since the first argument $-c_2 >0$ (cf. https://dlmf.nist.gov/13.9).



            Thus is seems there is no solution $neq 0$ with this product-ansatz, since the boundary condition at $z_1=a$ can not be fulfilled.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
              – Artem Zefirov
              Nov 28 at 16:54















            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Not a solution, just a few thoughts about a product ansatz, which the solution is most likely not of the form. If
            $$
            W(t,z_1,z_2)=w_1(t)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)
            $$

            then one obtains the three equations
            begin{align}
            left{ frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t} - c_1right} w_1(t) &= 0 \
            left{ frac{{rm d}^2}{{rm d}z_1^2} w_2(t) - frac{z_1}{h^2 epsilon} frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_1} + frac{c_2}{h^2epsilon} right} w_2(z_1) &= 0 \
            left { frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_2} + frac{epsilon c_1 + epsilon + c_2 + 1}{z_2 epsilon} right} w_3(z_2) &= 0
            end{align}

            with the solutions
            begin{align}
            w_1(t) &= C_1 , {rm e}^{c_1 t} tag{1} \
            w_2(z_1) &= C_{21} , z_1 , Mleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) + C_{22} , z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) tag{2} \
            w_3(z_2) &= C_3 , z_2^{-left(c_1 + 1 + frac{c_2+1}{epsilon}right)} tag{3}
            end{align}

            where $c_1,c_2,C_1,C_{21},C_{22},C_3$ are arbitrary constants and $M,U$ are the two Kummer solutions.



            You say that the solutions must vanish at $z_1=a, z_1=-infty$ and $z_2=pm infty$:



            If the first argument in the two Kummer solutions of $w_2(z_1)$ was a negative integer, they were polynomials of some degree and thus would not go to zero in the limit $z_1rightarrow -infty$. Thus $M$ and $U$ are not polynomials in which case we must have $C_{21}=0$ since $$M(a,b,z)sim frac{Gamma(b)}{Gamma(a)} , {rm e}^{z} , z^{a-b}$$ diverges exponentially. For the second term we have
            $$
            z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) sim |z_1|^{c_2} qquad {rm as} quad z_1 rightarrow -infty
            $$

            and so $c_2<0$. From (1) we must as well require $c_1<0$ and from (3) it follows $c_1+1+frac{c_2+1}{epsilon} > 0$ because of the boundary condition at $z_2=pm infty$.



            Turning back to $U$ however it seems we need to find zeros in order to fulfill the boundary condition at $z_1=a$. But the total number of zeros for $U(a,b,z)$ is given by $T(a,b)=T(a-b+1,2-b)$ if $bgeq 1$ which here becomes $Tleft(-frac{c_2}{2},frac{1}{2}right)=0$ since the first argument $-c_2 >0$ (cf. https://dlmf.nist.gov/13.9).



            Thus is seems there is no solution $neq 0$ with this product-ansatz, since the boundary condition at $z_1=a$ can not be fulfilled.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
              – Artem Zefirov
              Nov 28 at 16:54













            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            Not a solution, just a few thoughts about a product ansatz, which the solution is most likely not of the form. If
            $$
            W(t,z_1,z_2)=w_1(t)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)
            $$

            then one obtains the three equations
            begin{align}
            left{ frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t} - c_1right} w_1(t) &= 0 \
            left{ frac{{rm d}^2}{{rm d}z_1^2} w_2(t) - frac{z_1}{h^2 epsilon} frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_1} + frac{c_2}{h^2epsilon} right} w_2(z_1) &= 0 \
            left { frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_2} + frac{epsilon c_1 + epsilon + c_2 + 1}{z_2 epsilon} right} w_3(z_2) &= 0
            end{align}

            with the solutions
            begin{align}
            w_1(t) &= C_1 , {rm e}^{c_1 t} tag{1} \
            w_2(z_1) &= C_{21} , z_1 , Mleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) + C_{22} , z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) tag{2} \
            w_3(z_2) &= C_3 , z_2^{-left(c_1 + 1 + frac{c_2+1}{epsilon}right)} tag{3}
            end{align}

            where $c_1,c_2,C_1,C_{21},C_{22},C_3$ are arbitrary constants and $M,U$ are the two Kummer solutions.



            You say that the solutions must vanish at $z_1=a, z_1=-infty$ and $z_2=pm infty$:



            If the first argument in the two Kummer solutions of $w_2(z_1)$ was a negative integer, they were polynomials of some degree and thus would not go to zero in the limit $z_1rightarrow -infty$. Thus $M$ and $U$ are not polynomials in which case we must have $C_{21}=0$ since $$M(a,b,z)sim frac{Gamma(b)}{Gamma(a)} , {rm e}^{z} , z^{a-b}$$ diverges exponentially. For the second term we have
            $$
            z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) sim |z_1|^{c_2} qquad {rm as} quad z_1 rightarrow -infty
            $$

            and so $c_2<0$. From (1) we must as well require $c_1<0$ and from (3) it follows $c_1+1+frac{c_2+1}{epsilon} > 0$ because of the boundary condition at $z_2=pm infty$.



            Turning back to $U$ however it seems we need to find zeros in order to fulfill the boundary condition at $z_1=a$. But the total number of zeros for $U(a,b,z)$ is given by $T(a,b)=T(a-b+1,2-b)$ if $bgeq 1$ which here becomes $Tleft(-frac{c_2}{2},frac{1}{2}right)=0$ since the first argument $-c_2 >0$ (cf. https://dlmf.nist.gov/13.9).



            Thus is seems there is no solution $neq 0$ with this product-ansatz, since the boundary condition at $z_1=a$ can not be fulfilled.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            Not a solution, just a few thoughts about a product ansatz, which the solution is most likely not of the form. If
            $$
            W(t,z_1,z_2)=w_1(t)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)
            $$

            then one obtains the three equations
            begin{align}
            left{ frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t} - c_1right} w_1(t) &= 0 \
            left{ frac{{rm d}^2}{{rm d}z_1^2} w_2(t) - frac{z_1}{h^2 epsilon} frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_1} + frac{c_2}{h^2epsilon} right} w_2(z_1) &= 0 \
            left { frac{rm d}{{rm d}z_2} + frac{epsilon c_1 + epsilon + c_2 + 1}{z_2 epsilon} right} w_3(z_2) &= 0
            end{align}

            with the solutions
            begin{align}
            w_1(t) &= C_1 , {rm e}^{c_1 t} tag{1} \
            w_2(z_1) &= C_{21} , z_1 , Mleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) + C_{22} , z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) tag{2} \
            w_3(z_2) &= C_3 , z_2^{-left(c_1 + 1 + frac{c_2+1}{epsilon}right)} tag{3}
            end{align}

            where $c_1,c_2,C_1,C_{21},C_{22},C_3$ are arbitrary constants and $M,U$ are the two Kummer solutions.



            You say that the solutions must vanish at $z_1=a, z_1=-infty$ and $z_2=pm infty$:



            If the first argument in the two Kummer solutions of $w_2(z_1)$ was a negative integer, they were polynomials of some degree and thus would not go to zero in the limit $z_1rightarrow -infty$. Thus $M$ and $U$ are not polynomials in which case we must have $C_{21}=0$ since $$M(a,b,z)sim frac{Gamma(b)}{Gamma(a)} , {rm e}^{z} , z^{a-b}$$ diverges exponentially. For the second term we have
            $$
            z_1 , Uleft(frac{1-c_2}{2} , frac{3}{2} , frac{z_1^2}{2h^2epsilon} right) sim |z_1|^{c_2} qquad {rm as} quad z_1 rightarrow -infty
            $$

            and so $c_2<0$. From (1) we must as well require $c_1<0$ and from (3) it follows $c_1+1+frac{c_2+1}{epsilon} > 0$ because of the boundary condition at $z_2=pm infty$.



            Turning back to $U$ however it seems we need to find zeros in order to fulfill the boundary condition at $z_1=a$. But the total number of zeros for $U(a,b,z)$ is given by $T(a,b)=T(a-b+1,2-b)$ if $bgeq 1$ which here becomes $Tleft(-frac{c_2}{2},frac{1}{2}right)=0$ since the first argument $-c_2 >0$ (cf. https://dlmf.nist.gov/13.9).



            Thus is seems there is no solution $neq 0$ with this product-ansatz, since the boundary condition at $z_1=a$ can not be fulfilled.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Nov 24 at 3:32

























            answered Nov 24 at 3:01









            Diger

            1,581413




            1,581413












            • Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
              – Artem Zefirov
              Nov 28 at 16:54


















            • Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
              – Artem Zefirov
              Nov 28 at 16:54
















            Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
            – Artem Zefirov
            Nov 28 at 16:54




            Thanks for your answer. I've made a mistake in the origin equation. Being inspired with your idea I've submitted below my own solution. But it can be wrong.
            – Artem Zefirov
            Nov 28 at 16:54










            up vote
            1
            down vote













            It's just a drift of the solution. Using the same substitution for the correct system (each member enters with a positive sign)
            $$ W(tau,z)=w_1(tau)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)$$
            the next equations can be obtained:
            $$ begin{align*}
            frac{d w_1(tau)}{dtau}&-c_1 w_1(tau)=0\
            frac{d w_3(z_2)}{d z_2}&-frac{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}{z_2}w_3(z_2)=0\
            frac{d^2 w_2(z_1)}{d z_1^2}&+frac{z_1}{h^2 varepsilon} frac{d w_2(z_1)}{d z_1}+frac{c_2}{h^2varepsilon}w_2(z_1)=0
            end{align*}$$

            Solution for the first two equations can be presented as follows: $$
            begin{align*}
            w_1(tau)&=K_1 e^{c_1 tau}\
            w_3(z_2)&=K_3 z_2^{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}
            end{align*}
            $$

            In order to solve the third system let's consider new variables:
            $$
            x=frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}},quad a=c_2-1,quad w_2(x)=u(x)e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}
            $$

            and after substitution one can get a Weber's equation: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeberDifferentialEquations.html
            $$u''+(a+frac{1}{2}-frac{x^2}{4})u=0.$$
            It's known that parabolic cylinder functions $D_a(x)$ are solutions for this equation. They are orthogonal on the whole real space for $a in N$ (Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed., p.308):
            $$
            int_{-infty}^{infty}D_m(s)D_n(s) ds =delta_{mn}n! sqrt{2pi}
            $$

            Let's leave out for a while the problem of orthogonality of ${D_a(x)}$ for $ain R$ and $xin (-infty,frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}})$ and realize that the function
            $$
            w_{2,a}(x)=e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}D_a(x)
            $$

            is a solution for the most troublesome equation of ours. One need to find the eigenvalues ${a_k}$ such that the solution would satisfy the border condition. Thus,
            $$
            D_{a_k}left(frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)=0.
            $$

            The general solution for our initial equation can be expressed as a series:
            $$
            W(tau,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k e^{c_{1,k} tau} z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
            $$

            From the requirement of series convergence and the border condition for $z_2$ the constants $c_1,c_2$ should satisfy the next conditions:
            $$begin{align*}
            c_{1,k}&<0\
            c_{2,k}&=a_k+1\
            c_{1,k}&-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}<0
            end{align*}$$

            Coefficients $b_k$ are usually can be found from initial conditions. Let's assume that a delta function can be expanded as follows:
            $$
            W(0,z)=delta(z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty}f_k psi_k(z_1,z_2),
            $$

            where $$psi_k(z_1,z_2)=frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2) cdot d_k cdot D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right).$$ Here $frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2)-$ an orthonormal system of Hermite functions defined for $z_2in (-infty,infty)$ and $d_k -$ are normalizing coefficients for the functions $D_{a_k}(z_1)$. I wonder on what domain shall we normalize them. It depends of what domain these functions can be transformed into orthogonal functions. In case the origin domain $(-infty,a)$ is not satisfactory can we use an infinite interval $(-infty,infty)$ while expanding our initial condition into the series?



            On the other hand,
            $$
            W(0,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
            $$

            Can we use this idea in order to define coefficients $b_k$?






            share|cite|improve this answer



























              up vote
              1
              down vote













              It's just a drift of the solution. Using the same substitution for the correct system (each member enters with a positive sign)
              $$ W(tau,z)=w_1(tau)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)$$
              the next equations can be obtained:
              $$ begin{align*}
              frac{d w_1(tau)}{dtau}&-c_1 w_1(tau)=0\
              frac{d w_3(z_2)}{d z_2}&-frac{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}{z_2}w_3(z_2)=0\
              frac{d^2 w_2(z_1)}{d z_1^2}&+frac{z_1}{h^2 varepsilon} frac{d w_2(z_1)}{d z_1}+frac{c_2}{h^2varepsilon}w_2(z_1)=0
              end{align*}$$

              Solution for the first two equations can be presented as follows: $$
              begin{align*}
              w_1(tau)&=K_1 e^{c_1 tau}\
              w_3(z_2)&=K_3 z_2^{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}
              end{align*}
              $$

              In order to solve the third system let's consider new variables:
              $$
              x=frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}},quad a=c_2-1,quad w_2(x)=u(x)e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}
              $$

              and after substitution one can get a Weber's equation: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeberDifferentialEquations.html
              $$u''+(a+frac{1}{2}-frac{x^2}{4})u=0.$$
              It's known that parabolic cylinder functions $D_a(x)$ are solutions for this equation. They are orthogonal on the whole real space for $a in N$ (Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed., p.308):
              $$
              int_{-infty}^{infty}D_m(s)D_n(s) ds =delta_{mn}n! sqrt{2pi}
              $$

              Let's leave out for a while the problem of orthogonality of ${D_a(x)}$ for $ain R$ and $xin (-infty,frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}})$ and realize that the function
              $$
              w_{2,a}(x)=e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}D_a(x)
              $$

              is a solution for the most troublesome equation of ours. One need to find the eigenvalues ${a_k}$ such that the solution would satisfy the border condition. Thus,
              $$
              D_{a_k}left(frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)=0.
              $$

              The general solution for our initial equation can be expressed as a series:
              $$
              W(tau,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k e^{c_{1,k} tau} z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
              $$

              From the requirement of series convergence and the border condition for $z_2$ the constants $c_1,c_2$ should satisfy the next conditions:
              $$begin{align*}
              c_{1,k}&<0\
              c_{2,k}&=a_k+1\
              c_{1,k}&-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}<0
              end{align*}$$

              Coefficients $b_k$ are usually can be found from initial conditions. Let's assume that a delta function can be expanded as follows:
              $$
              W(0,z)=delta(z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty}f_k psi_k(z_1,z_2),
              $$

              where $$psi_k(z_1,z_2)=frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2) cdot d_k cdot D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right).$$ Here $frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2)-$ an orthonormal system of Hermite functions defined for $z_2in (-infty,infty)$ and $d_k -$ are normalizing coefficients for the functions $D_{a_k}(z_1)$. I wonder on what domain shall we normalize them. It depends of what domain these functions can be transformed into orthogonal functions. In case the origin domain $(-infty,a)$ is not satisfactory can we use an infinite interval $(-infty,infty)$ while expanding our initial condition into the series?



              On the other hand,
              $$
              W(0,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
              $$

              Can we use this idea in order to define coefficients $b_k$?






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                1
                down vote










                up vote
                1
                down vote









                It's just a drift of the solution. Using the same substitution for the correct system (each member enters with a positive sign)
                $$ W(tau,z)=w_1(tau)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)$$
                the next equations can be obtained:
                $$ begin{align*}
                frac{d w_1(tau)}{dtau}&-c_1 w_1(tau)=0\
                frac{d w_3(z_2)}{d z_2}&-frac{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}{z_2}w_3(z_2)=0\
                frac{d^2 w_2(z_1)}{d z_1^2}&+frac{z_1}{h^2 varepsilon} frac{d w_2(z_1)}{d z_1}+frac{c_2}{h^2varepsilon}w_2(z_1)=0
                end{align*}$$

                Solution for the first two equations can be presented as follows: $$
                begin{align*}
                w_1(tau)&=K_1 e^{c_1 tau}\
                w_3(z_2)&=K_3 z_2^{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}
                end{align*}
                $$

                In order to solve the third system let's consider new variables:
                $$
                x=frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}},quad a=c_2-1,quad w_2(x)=u(x)e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}
                $$

                and after substitution one can get a Weber's equation: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeberDifferentialEquations.html
                $$u''+(a+frac{1}{2}-frac{x^2}{4})u=0.$$
                It's known that parabolic cylinder functions $D_a(x)$ are solutions for this equation. They are orthogonal on the whole real space for $a in N$ (Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed., p.308):
                $$
                int_{-infty}^{infty}D_m(s)D_n(s) ds =delta_{mn}n! sqrt{2pi}
                $$

                Let's leave out for a while the problem of orthogonality of ${D_a(x)}$ for $ain R$ and $xin (-infty,frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}})$ and realize that the function
                $$
                w_{2,a}(x)=e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}D_a(x)
                $$

                is a solution for the most troublesome equation of ours. One need to find the eigenvalues ${a_k}$ such that the solution would satisfy the border condition. Thus,
                $$
                D_{a_k}left(frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)=0.
                $$

                The general solution for our initial equation can be expressed as a series:
                $$
                W(tau,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k e^{c_{1,k} tau} z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
                $$

                From the requirement of series convergence and the border condition for $z_2$ the constants $c_1,c_2$ should satisfy the next conditions:
                $$begin{align*}
                c_{1,k}&<0\
                c_{2,k}&=a_k+1\
                c_{1,k}&-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}<0
                end{align*}$$

                Coefficients $b_k$ are usually can be found from initial conditions. Let's assume that a delta function can be expanded as follows:
                $$
                W(0,z)=delta(z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty}f_k psi_k(z_1,z_2),
                $$

                where $$psi_k(z_1,z_2)=frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2) cdot d_k cdot D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right).$$ Here $frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2)-$ an orthonormal system of Hermite functions defined for $z_2in (-infty,infty)$ and $d_k -$ are normalizing coefficients for the functions $D_{a_k}(z_1)$. I wonder on what domain shall we normalize them. It depends of what domain these functions can be transformed into orthogonal functions. In case the origin domain $(-infty,a)$ is not satisfactory can we use an infinite interval $(-infty,infty)$ while expanding our initial condition into the series?



                On the other hand,
                $$
                W(0,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
                $$

                Can we use this idea in order to define coefficients $b_k$?






                share|cite|improve this answer














                It's just a drift of the solution. Using the same substitution for the correct system (each member enters with a positive sign)
                $$ W(tau,z)=w_1(tau)w_2(z_1)w_3(z_2)$$
                the next equations can be obtained:
                $$ begin{align*}
                frac{d w_1(tau)}{dtau}&-c_1 w_1(tau)=0\
                frac{d w_3(z_2)}{d z_2}&-frac{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}{z_2}w_3(z_2)=0\
                frac{d^2 w_2(z_1)}{d z_1^2}&+frac{z_1}{h^2 varepsilon} frac{d w_2(z_1)}{d z_1}+frac{c_2}{h^2varepsilon}w_2(z_1)=0
                end{align*}$$

                Solution for the first two equations can be presented as follows: $$
                begin{align*}
                w_1(tau)&=K_1 e^{c_1 tau}\
                w_3(z_2)&=K_3 z_2^{c_1-1+(c_2-1)/varepsilon}
                end{align*}
                $$

                In order to solve the third system let's consider new variables:
                $$
                x=frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}},quad a=c_2-1,quad w_2(x)=u(x)e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}
                $$

                and after substitution one can get a Weber's equation: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeberDifferentialEquations.html
                $$u''+(a+frac{1}{2}-frac{x^2}{4})u=0.$$
                It's known that parabolic cylinder functions $D_a(x)$ are solutions for this equation. They are orthogonal on the whole real space for $a in N$ (Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed., p.308):
                $$
                int_{-infty}^{infty}D_m(s)D_n(s) ds =delta_{mn}n! sqrt{2pi}
                $$

                Let's leave out for a while the problem of orthogonality of ${D_a(x)}$ for $ain R$ and $xin (-infty,frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}})$ and realize that the function
                $$
                w_{2,a}(x)=e^{frac{-x^2}{4}}D_a(x)
                $$

                is a solution for the most troublesome equation of ours. One need to find the eigenvalues ${a_k}$ such that the solution would satisfy the border condition. Thus,
                $$
                D_{a_k}left(frac{a}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)=0.
                $$

                The general solution for our initial equation can be expressed as a series:
                $$
                W(tau,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k e^{c_{1,k} tau} z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
                $$

                From the requirement of series convergence and the border condition for $z_2$ the constants $c_1,c_2$ should satisfy the next conditions:
                $$begin{align*}
                c_{1,k}&<0\
                c_{2,k}&=a_k+1\
                c_{1,k}&-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}<0
                end{align*}$$

                Coefficients $b_k$ are usually can be found from initial conditions. Let's assume that a delta function can be expanded as follows:
                $$
                W(0,z)=delta(z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty}f_k psi_k(z_1,z_2),
                $$

                where $$psi_k(z_1,z_2)=frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2) cdot d_k cdot D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right).$$ Here $frac{1}{sqrt{2pi}k!}He_k(z_2)-$ an orthonormal system of Hermite functions defined for $z_2in (-infty,infty)$ and $d_k -$ are normalizing coefficients for the functions $D_{a_k}(z_1)$. I wonder on what domain shall we normalize them. It depends of what domain these functions can be transformed into orthogonal functions. In case the origin domain $(-infty,a)$ is not satisfactory can we use an infinite interval $(-infty,infty)$ while expanding our initial condition into the series?



                On the other hand,
                $$
                W(0,z)=sum_{k=1}^{infty} b_k z_2^{c_{1,k}-1+frac{c_{2,k}-1}{varepsilon}}e^{frac{z_1^2}{4 h^2varepsilon}} D_{a_k}left(frac{z_1}{h sqrt{varepsilon}}right)
                $$

                Can we use this idea in order to define coefficients $b_k$?







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Nov 29 at 13:12

























                answered Nov 28 at 16:52









                Artem Zefirov

                979




                979






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3011003%2fsolution-of-the-parabolic-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Le Mesnil-Réaume

                    Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                    web3.py web3.isConnected() returns false always