Part 2: you're not lucky
As explained here:
- Mathematicians are a lazy bunch.
- Facing y''+a(x)y'+b(x)y=r(x) (1)y''+a(x)y'+b(x)y=0. (2)
Today, we suppose you're still lazy but not lucky. First, let's simplify. (Lazy and simple-minded, euh?)
What if we managed to get rid of y' in the equation (2)? In solving third and fourth order algebraic equations, it helps a lot to eliminate the next-but-highest term. Here, getting rid of y' doesn't help that much, but is does make things a little lighter. OK, let's head for
As simple as it gets
What if we managed to get rid of y' in the equation (2)? In solving third and fourth order algebraic equations, it helps a lot to eliminate the next-but-highest term. Here, getting rid of y' doesn't help that much, but is does make things a little lighter. OK, let's head for
y''+b(x)y=0. (3)
One solution of (3)
To obtain a solution of (3), there is the long established method of successive approximations, to be found in, e.g., E. L. Ince, Ordinary Differential Equations, 1927. This strategy results in a sequence of functions, whose uniform convergence requires to artificially adapt the M-test, which is naturally designed for series.
The lazy mathematician, of course, prefers a formula over a strategy. Our formula for φ will be a series, whose uniform convergence can be established most naturally by the M-test. Some notation is required. We fix x0 in the interval under consideration, and for any continuous function f we denote by If the antiderivative of f vanishing in x0. To save parentheses, we concatenate antiderivatives and products from right to left. Thus, for instance, I2bI2b stands for the function obtained by twice integrating b, multiplying the result by b, and integrating the product twice.
And here it comes (ta-ta!!!):
φ =1-I2b+I2bI2b-I2bI2bI2b+...
Full solution of (3)
While we're at it, why not solve (3) completely? The same proof shows that
ψ =-x0+x-I2bx+I2bxI2bx-I2bxI2bxI2bx+...
(we have written x instead of the function mapping x to x) is also a solution of (3). From
it is clear that both solutions are independent, and have a Wronskian determinant 1. Hence, (3) is completely solved, its solutions being
with 2 arbitrary constants. Examples with x0=0 (immediately obtained):
Nothing beats our formulas here!
If you are lazy but unlucky, you first pass from (1) to
We have kept the notation b(x) and r(x), but both functions have changed in the process of eliminating y'. Instead of b(x) we should consider B(X) as defined on the first blackboard, and change r(x) to R(X) in exactly the same way. With φ and ψ defined as above, the general solution of (8) is (ta-taa!!)
Extremely lazy proof-by-verification on the blackboard below.
φ(x0)=1, φ'(x0)=0, ψ(x0)=0, ψ'(x0)=1
it is clear that both solutions are independent, and have a Wronskian determinant 1. Hence, (3) is completely solved, its solutions being
c1φ+c2ψ
with 2 arbitrary constants. Examples with x0=0 (immediately obtained):
Nothing beats our formulas here!
Full solution of the linear 2nd order ODE
If you are lazy but unlucky, you first pass from (1) to
y''+b(x)y=r(x). (8)
We have kept the notation b(x) and r(x), but both functions have changed in the process of eliminating y'. Instead of b(x) we should consider B(X) as defined on the first blackboard, and change r(x) to R(X) in exactly the same way. With φ and ψ defined as above, the general solution of (8) is (ta-taa!!)