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.

Can someone give me hint on how to show that the fact that $\alpha$ is a root of order $l+1$ of the polynomial $p(x)=x^n+a_1x^{n-1}+\cdots+a_n$ implies that $t\mapsto y^l e^{\lambda y}$ is a solution of the ODE $x^{(n)}+a_1 x^{(n-1)}+\cdots + a_n x=0$ ?

I tried doing a direct calculation, but didn't succeed (altough I would prefer this direct route, since I don't yet see all the connection between the different theorems of the theory for linear systems of ODEs, so it would be easier for me to understand)...then I tried using some theory about ODEs but didn't get far: The ODE is equivalent to a system of linear ODEs of order 1 and the characteristic polynomial of the matrix of that system is precisely the polynomial above, but there I kind of stop dead, since calculating the Jordan normal form is just horrible, so I thought there must be some easier, less calculation-heavy way. Could you show me the way ?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted

The most succinct way I know how to do this is to think about differential operators. Letting $D$ denote the differentiation operator, we want to compute the nullspace of $p(D)$ where $p$ is some polynomial. The first basic observation is that if $p(z) = \prod (z - \lambda_i)^{m_i}$, then $$p(D) = \prod (D - \lambda_i)^{m_i}$$

and each of the operators in this product commute with each other; in particular, if $(D - \lambda_i)^{m_i} f = 0$ for some function $f$, then $p(D) f = 0$ as well. So we are reduced to the problem of solving $$(D - \lambda_i)^{m_i} f = 0.$$

Since we know that $(D - \lambda_i) f = 0$ has solution $f = C e^{\lambda_i x}$, it might occur to us to write $f = e^{\lambda_i x} g$ where $g$ is some function.

Proposition: $(D - \lambda_i)^{m_i} e^{\lambda_i x} g = e^{\lambda_i x} D^{m_i} g$.

Proof. It suffices to compute that $(D - \lambda_i) e^{\lambda_i x} g = Dg$.

It follows that $(D - \lambda_i)^{m_i} e^{\lambda_i x} g = 0$ if and only if $D^{m_i} g = 0$, hence if and only if $g$ is a polynomial of degree at most $m_i - 1$.

share|improve this answer

Define a series of variables: $x_1 = x,x_2=\dot x, x_3= \ddot x, \ldots$. Then, rephrase the given ODE as $$ x^{(n)}= -a_1 x^{(n-1)}+\cdots - a_n x $$ This allows us to write the differential equation in a compact matrix equation form $$ \dot x(t) := A x(t) = \pmatrix{0 &1 &0 &\ldots &0\\0 &0 &1 &\ldots& 0\\ \vdots &&\ddots &\ddots &0\\0 &&&0&1\\-a_n &-a_{n-1} &\ldots &-a_2 &-a_1}x(t) $$

Then, the solution of this matrix differential equation is given by $$ x(t) = e^{At}x_0 = V^{-1}e^{Jt}Vx_0 $$ The determinant of $(x I-A)$ is $p(x)=x^n+a_1x^{n-1}+\cdots+a_n$ and can be shown by expanding along the last column. Then, you don't need to calculate much. The remaining step is assuming an arbitrary sized Jordan block in $J$ and then computing e^{Jt}. There you will see that when $\alpha$ is an eigenvalue of $A$ associated with a Jordan block of size at least two then, the result follows. Look at the state-transition matrix in this link for the general formula.

share|improve this answer
    
Yes, but how does the result follow from looking $e^{Jt}$ ? All I get from that is the components of $x(t)$ are linear combinations of $e^{\alpha t} t^l$, with $l\geq 1$, if the Jordanblock has at least size two. I haven't used, as far as I can see, at any point that $\alpha$ is a root of order $l+1$ of the polynomial $p$. Or am I maybe missing something ? –  user19822 Dec 5 '11 at 7:11
    
@user19822 Set $t=y$ and $\alpha=\lambda$ and that seems about it. –  user13838 Dec 5 '11 at 11:49

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.