2
$\begingroup$

Given a second-order linear ordinary differential equation, \begin{equation} \epsilon^2 \frac{d^2y}{dx^2} = Q(x) y(x), \tag{1}\label{1} \end{equation} where $\epsilon$ is regarded as a small positive number, a typical explanation of the WKB method (e.g. Ch. 10 of Bender and Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers, 1978) starts with writing $y(x)$ as \begin{equation} y(x) = \exp\left(\frac{1}{\delta}S(x,\delta)\right), \tag{2}\label{2} \end{equation} and assuming that $S(x,\delta)$ has an asymptotic series in $\delta$, \begin{align} S(x,\delta) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \delta^n S_n(x) & \text{ as } \delta\rightarrow&0+. \tag{3}\label{3} \end{align} Then, by substituting eqs. (\ref{2}) and (\ref{3}) into eq. (\ref{1}) and dividing both sides by $\exp(S/\delta)$, it is claimed that \begin{align} \frac{\epsilon^2}{\delta^2} \left[\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \delta^n \frac{d S_n}{dx}\right]^2 +\frac{\epsilon^2}{\delta} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \delta^n \frac{d^2 S_n}{dx^2} \sim& Q(x) & \text{ as } \delta\rightarrow&0+. \tag{4}\label{4} \end{align} From here, the argument proceeds that we can set $\delta = \epsilon$ from dominant balance, and that we can equate the like powers of $\epsilon$ on both sides to yield differential equations for the coefficient functions $\{S_n(x)\}$ as \begin{align} \left(\frac{dS_0}{dx}\right)^2 =& Q(x), \tag{5}\label{5}\\ 2 \frac{dS_0}{dx}\frac{dS_1}{dx}+\frac{d^2S_0}{dx^2}=&0, \tag{6}\label{6}\\ \dots \end{align} and these equations are solved one after another.

Here is my question. How is it justified to differentiate the asymptotic series in eq. (\ref{3}) to derive eq. (\ref{4})?

I wondered that maybe we can use the fact that $y(x)$ is a solution of eq. (\ref{1}) in some way, but I don't find a way so far.

I read that the derivatives of both sides of an asymptotic relation does not always construct another asymptotic relation, and I guess that even if \begin{align} f(x,\epsilon)\sim& g_0(x) + g_1(x) \epsilon + g_2(x) \epsilon^2 +\cdots& \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow& 0, \tag{7}\label{7} \end{align} uniformly in some domain of $x$, it does not necessarily follow that \begin{align} \frac{df}{dx}(x,\epsilon) \sim& \frac{dg_0}{dx}(x) + \frac{dg_1}{dx}(x)\epsilon + \frac{dg_2}{dx}(x) \epsilon^2 +\cdots& \text{ as }\epsilon \rightarrow& 0. \tag{8}\label{8} \end{align} Or, does it follow (under some conditions)?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I am answering to my own question while waiting for more answers and comments.

To keep assumption minimum, I think the right thing to assume is that $\partial S/\partial x$, rather than $S$ itself, has an asymptotic expansion. Then, we are allowed to integrate this asymptotic expansion term by term, yielding the asymptotic expansion of $S$. Furthermore, we can justify differentiating the asymptotic expansion of $\partial S/\partial x$ term by term to yield the asymptotic expansion of $\partial^2 S/\partial x^2$, which we need for solving the differential equation, using the Ricatti equation to be satisfied by $\partial S/\partial x$.

So, let me explain this idea in more detail. As wrote in the original question, we solve the ordinary differential equation, \begin{equation} \epsilon^2 \frac{d^2y}{dx^2} = Q(x) y(x). \tag{1}\label{1a} \end{equation} Note that the solution $y$ depends on the parameter $\epsilon$ as well as the independent variable $x$ of the differential equation. Let us transform the dependent variable from $y$ to $S$ by \begin{equation} y(x,\epsilon) = \exp\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon}S(x,\epsilon)\right). \tag{2}\label{2a} \end{equation} By substituting eq. (\ref{2a}) into eq. (\ref{1a}), we obtain the differential equation to be satisfied by $S$ as \begin{equation} \left[\frac{\partial S}{\partial x}\right]^2 +\epsilon \frac{\partial^2 S}{\partial x^2} = Q(x). \tag{3}\label{3a} \end{equation} By introducing a notation, \begin{equation} u(x,\epsilon) = \frac{\partial S}{\partial x}(x,\epsilon), \tag{4}\label{4a} \end{equation} eq. (\ref{3a}) can be written as \begin{equation} \epsilon \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + u^2 = Q(x). \tag{5}\label{5a} \end{equation} This is the Ricatti equation for $u$.

Now let us make an assumption that $u(x,\epsilon)$ has a uniform asymptotic power series in some domain $D$ of $x$ as $\epsilon$ approaches zero with $\epsilon >0$, i.e., \begin{align} u(x,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} u_n(x) \epsilon^n & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+& \text{ uniformly for } x\in D. \tag{6}\label{6a} \end{align} We first demonstrate that the asymptotic expansion of $\partial u/\partial x$ (which is equal to $\partial^2 S/\partial x^2$) is in the form obtained by differentiating eq. (\ref{6a}) term by term.

From the Ricatti equation (\ref{4a}), \begin{equation} \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} = -\frac{1}{\epsilon} [u(x,\epsilon)]^2 +\frac{1}{\epsilon} Q(x), \tag{7}\label{7a} \end{equation} and from the assumption (\ref{6a}), $u^2$ also has the asymptotic power series, \begin{align} [u(x,\epsilon)]^2 \sim& \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} U_k(x) \epsilon^k,& \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+, \tag{8}\label{8a} \end{align} where \begin{align} U_k(x) =& \sum_{n=0}^k u_n(x) u_{k-n}(x),& k=&0,1,2,\cdots. \tag{9}\label{9} \end{align} From eqs. (\ref{7a}) and (\ref{8a}), it follows that $\partial u/\partial x$ has an asymptotic expansion, \begin{align} \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} v_k(x) \epsilon^{k-1} & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+, \tag{10}\label{10} \end{align} where \begin{equation} v_0(x) = -U_0(x) +Q(x) = -[u_0(x)]^2 + Q(x), \tag{11}\label{11} \end{equation} and \begin{align} v_k(x) =& U_k(x), & k=& 1,2,3,\dots. \tag{12}\label{12} \end{align}

Note that we are allowed to integrate an asymptotic expansion term by term. That is, from eq. (\ref{10}) it follows that for any $a$ and $b$ in $D$, \begin{align} \int_a^b dx \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} =u(b,\epsilon)-u(a,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \left[\int_a^b dx v_k(x)\right] \epsilon^{k-1},& \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+. \tag{13}\label{13} \end{align} Note also that we are allowed to sum two asymptotic expansions, and from eq. (\ref{6a}) it follows that \begin{align} u(b,\epsilon) - u(a,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} [u_n(b)-u_n(a)] \epsilon^n & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+. \tag{14}\label{14} \end{align} Since an asymptotic expansion of a function with a given sequence of gauge functions is unique, the expansion coefficients in eqs. (\ref{13}) and (\ref{14}) must agree for each power of $\epsilon$. Especially, the coefficient for the $\epsilon^{-1}$ term in eq. (\ref{13}) must vanish, i.e., \begin{equation} \int_a^b dx v_0(x) =0, \tag{15}\label{15} \end{equation} for all $a$ and $b$ in $D$. This means that \begin{equation} v_0(x) = 0, \tag{16}\label{16} \end{equation} From the comparison of the $\epsilon^n$ ($n\geq 0$) terms between eq. (\ref{13}) and eq. (\ref{14}), \begin{equation} \int_a^b dx v_{n+1}(x) = u_n(b) - u_n(a), \tag{17}\label{17} \end{equation} for all $a$ and $b$ in $D$. This means that \begin{align} v_{n+1}(x) =& \frac{du_n}{dx}(x), & n=&0,1,2,\cdots & \text{ for all } x \in D. \tag{18}\label{18} \end{align} Using eqs. (\ref{16}) and (\ref{18}), we can rewrite eq. (\ref{10}) as \begin{align} \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{du_n}{dx}(x) \epsilon^n & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+, \tag{19}\label{19} \end{align} Herewith we demonstrated that the asymptotic expansion of $\partial u/\partial x$ ($=\partial^2 S/\partial x^2$) is in the form obtained by differentiating eq. (\ref{6a}) term by term.

Before moving on to deriving the asymptotic expansion of $S$, let us think about the meaning of eqs. (\ref{16}) and (\ref{18}). Substituting eq. (\ref{11}) into eq. (\ref{16}), we obtain \begin{equation} [u_0(x)]^2 = Q(x), \tag{20}\label{20} \end{equation} or equivalently, \begin{equation} u_0(x) = \pm [Q(x)]^{1/2} \tag{21}\label{21} \end{equation} Substituting eq. (\ref{12}) into eq. (\ref{18}), we obtain \begin{align} U_{n+1}(x) =& \frac{du_n}{dx}(x) & n=&0,1,2,\dots, \tag{22}\label{22} \end{align} which can be rewritten with eq. (\ref{9}) as \begin{align} \sum_{l=0}^{n+1} u_l(x) u_{n+1-l}(x) =&\frac{du_n}{dx}(x), & n=&0,1,2,\cdots , \tag{23}\label{23} \end{align} or equivalently, \begin{align} u_{n+1}(x) =& \frac{1}{2 u_0(x)}\left\{ -\sum_{l=1}^n u_l(x) u_{n+1-l}(x) +\frac{du_n}{dx}(x)\right\}, & n=&0,1,2,\cdots . \tag{24}\label{24} \end{align} We can see that eqs. (\ref{21}) and (\ref{24}) determine the coefficients $\{u_n(x)\}$ of the asymptotic power series of $u(x,\epsilon)$ ($=\partial S/\partial x$) recursively.

Now let us consider the asymptotic expansion of $S(x,\epsilon)$. From eq. (\ref{4a}), we have \begin{equation} S(b,\epsilon) -S(a,\epsilon) = \int_a^b dx u(x,\epsilon) , \tag{25}\label{25} \end{equation} for all $a$ and $b$ in $D$. Since we are allowed integrate an asymptotic power series term by term, from eq. (\ref{6a}), \begin{align} \int_a^b dx u(x,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \left[ \int_a^b dx u_n(x)\right] \epsilon^n & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+, \tag{26}\label{26} \end{align} for all $a$ and $b$ in $D$. From eq. (\ref{25}) and (\ref{26}), we can say that $S(x,\epsilon)$ has an asymptotic power series, \begin{align} S(x,\epsilon) \sim& \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} S_n(x) \epsilon^n & \text{ as } \epsilon\rightarrow&0+, \tag{27}\label{27} \end{align} and \begin{align} S_n(x) =& \int_a^x dt u_n(t)+S_n(a) , & n=&0,1,2,\dots \tag{28}\label{28} \end{align} for all $x$ and $a$ in $D$. From eq. (\ref{28}), we can say \begin{align} u_n(x) =& \frac{dS_n}{dx}, & n=&0,1,2,\dots \tag{29}\label{29} \end{align} Herewith we confirmed that the assumption that $u(x,\epsilon)$ (=$\partial S/\partial x$) can be expanded in a uniform asymptotic power series implies that $S$ is also expanded in the asymptotic power series, and that the former asymptotic series is obtained by term-wise differentiation of the latter asymptotic series.

We can write eqs. (\ref{21}) and (\ref{24}) in terms of $\{S_n(x)\}$ as \begin{equation} \frac{dS_0}{dx} = \pm [Q(x)]^{1/2}, \tag{30}\label{30} \end{equation} and \begin{align} \frac{dS_{n+1}}{dx} =& \left[2 \frac{dS_0}{dx}\right]^{-1}\left\{ -\sum_{l=1}^n \frac{dS_l}{dx} \frac{dS_{n+1-l}}{dx} +\frac{d^2S_n}{dx^2}\right\}, & n=&0,1,2,\cdots . \tag{31}\label{31} \end{align} We see these equations [eqs. (\ref{30}) and (\ref{31})] in many textbooks explaining the WKB approximation.

So, in summary, by assuming the existence of the asymptotic power series for $\partial S/\partial x$, we can justify differentiating it term by term using the Ricatti equation, and we are guaranteed to have the asymptotic power series for $S$ whose term-wise differentiation gives the assumed asymptotic power series for $\partial S/\partial x$.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

In the context of asymptotic series, the `$\sim$'-symbol means the following:

Fix $N \in \mathbb{N}$. There exists a $\delta_0 > 0$ such that for all positive $\delta < \delta_0$, we have the equality \begin{equation} S(x,\delta) = \sum_{n=0}^N s_n(x) \delta^n + \mathcal{O}(\delta^{N+1}), \tag{*} \end{equation} which is uniformly valid (i.e. for all $x$ in the domain in question).

If we can find a domain for $x$ and a $\delta_0>0$ such that the above holds for all $N\in \mathbb{N}$, then we use the notation \begin{equation} S(x,\delta) \sim \sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(x) \delta^n. \end{equation}

Note that this not mean that the series converges in the classical sense. Moreover, we can add a term like $e^{-x/\delta}$ to the original function without changing the series approximation at any order. For more information on asymptotic series, see e.g.

F. Verhulst, Methods and Applications of Singular Perturbations, Springer, 2005.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your answer. I used the symbol $\sim$ as you described in my question, and I have no problem with the definition of an asymptotic series. My question was: if you differentiate the series on the right hand side of your second equation term by term with respect to $x$, then is the resulting series asymptotic to $\partial S(x,\delta)/\partial x$? $\endgroup$ – norio Aug 26 '16 at 19:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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