Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I think I may have misinterpreted this question, anyhow I am very confused. Here it is in its full glory:

Let $f(r,\theta, t)=\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^\infty \sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty a_{nk}J_n(j_{nk}r)e^{in\theta-j_{nk}^2 t}$, defined on the unit disc, where $J_n$ is the $n$th degree Bessel function. Initial conditions $f_0(r,\theta)$ and we have $R(r,\theta,t):= {f(r,\theta,t)\over f_0(r,\theta)}$. We also have $f_0=R_0 \,\,\,\,\forall r<1$.

I have to show that $a_{0k}={2R_0\over j_{0k}J_1(j_{0k})}$ and $a_{nk}=0$ otherwise.

But isn't $R_0=1$? (I am guessing $R_0=R(r,\theta,0)$?) Since isn't $f(r,\theta, t)=\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^\infty \sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty a_{nk}J_n(j_{nk}r)e^{in\theta-j_{nk}^2 t}\implies f_0(r,\theta)=\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^\infty \sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty a_{nk}J_n(j_{nk}r)e^{in\theta}$?

Thanks in advance!

share|improve this question
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.