140 reputation
5
bio website
location Madrid, Spain
age
visits member for 2 years, 1 month
seen Apr 14 at 16:44

Hi there, I am a Telecommunication Engineering student in Madrid. It is a 5-year degree which includes both Computer Science and Electrical Engineering courses.

So far, the courses I have liked most were about Digital Signal Processing and Microwave electronics, while I am willing to learn about Pattern Recognition and Speech Recognition next year.


Sep
2
comment Stuck on Laplace's Equation
Hi! Thank you very much for your answer. I don't have such a deep insight into PDEs, so it would really help to have a "rule" for it. From what I have understood, solutions are unique in every Laplace's Equation when its boundary conditions are $f(x,y)$? Would that be true for both Neumann and Dirichlet boundary conditions? So, can I even say that for every similar Laplace's Equation to this one, once I find a solution, it will be unique? That rule would apply to $\theta$, v and w in my problem, wouldn't it? Thank you!
Aug
23
comment Eigenvalue in Sturm-Liouville problem: why isn't this one valid?
@Tunococ Hi, thank you very much. As you say, b is actually $\sqrt{\lambda-1}$. Now I see that it also has to be a real number. Thank you!
Aug
16
comment Drum membrane wave equation general solution (non-symmetrical)
Hi @doraemonpaul, I alreade read that before posting but, even understanding it, I can't find why the solution in my notes works. In fact, when I try to do it I end up with something more similar to wikipedia's. Even so, I can't find the way to the radius equation here, while they should be equivalent.
Aug
4
comment Wave Equation Neumann Boundary Conditions
Thank you, timur!
Aug
4
comment Wave Equation Neumann Boundary Conditions
Thank you very much!
Aug
4
comment Wave Equation Neumann Boundary Conditions
thank you very much! As you said, I skipped that $\lambda=0$ solution. I just have a little question concerning the superposition of the solutions. Solving for $\lambda=0$ in both equations, I get that $X(x)=X_0$ and $T(t)=A_0t+B_0$ are solutions. Is it true that $u(x,t)=(A_0t+B_0)X_0$ is a solution for the problem? And then, thanks to linearity we can assume that $X_0=1$. Am I right? So finally we get the most general solution adding the ones for $\lambda>0$. Now that I have written this, it seems completely right. I think I was confusing when I should add or multiply solutions.
Aug
3
comment Wave Equation Neumann Boundary Conditions
@Valentin ...isn't it correct? I have also noticed that, when solving for $T(t)$, the solution assumes $T_0''=0$ so $T_0=A_0t+B_0$. I understand that, but I can't trace the origin of that $T_0''=0$ condition. Also, why should it be added instead of being included in the Fourier Series? Thank you very much.
Aug
3
comment Wave Equation Neumann Boundary Conditions
@Valentin Hi, thank you very much. You are completely right, I made a mistake copying the BC. It's corrected now. About the eigenvalues, in all the exercises I've done, $\lambda_n$ is computed in the spatial equation and then substituted into the temporal one.