2
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

I proceeded with using separation of variables:

$$\frac{T'(t)}{kT(t)}=\frac{X''(x)}{X(x)}=-λ$$

Assuming $λ=β^2>0$, I end up with:

$$X''(x)+λX(x)=0$$ and its general solution:

$$X(x)=A_n\cos(\beta x)+B_n\sin(\beta x)$$

Now, the periodic boundary conditions come to play:

$$X(L)=X(-L)$$ $$A_n\cos(\beta L)+B_n\sin(\beta L)=A_n\cos(\beta L)-B_n\sin(\beta L)$$ $2B_n\sin(\beta L)=0$ so $\beta L=n\pi, n=1,2,\ldots$

$$λ=\left(\frac{n\pi}{L}\right)^2$$ which can be derived from the second condition as well.

My question has to do with (b):

Why do we have to separate $\dfrac{A_0}{2}$ from the rest of the infinite sum and what's the problem with $n$ being $0$?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

When you solved the equation $\sin\beta L=0$, your solution should be $\beta=\frac{n\pi}L$ for $n=\dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,\ldots$. So the general solution is $$\sum_{-\infty}^\infty (\text{stuff})$$Now, since this $(\text{stuff})$ is symmetric in $n$, you can group the terms to get $$\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (\text{stuff}) = (\text{stuff at } n=0) + 2\sum_{n=1}^\infty (\text{stuff})$$You'll find that all that $\text{stuff}$ comes out to $A_0/2$ when it is evaluated at $n=0$, which is where that comes from.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ +1 for $\displaystyle\sum \text{(stuff)}$ notation :) $\endgroup$ – hypergeometric May 4 '18 at 19:26
  • $\begingroup$ Why do we have to take into account negative values of n? Examining the given form of the solution, I see that there's no 2 in front of the infinite sum. Am I wrong? $\endgroup$ – Andrew May 4 '18 at 19:33
  • $\begingroup$ @AndrewTzevas you have to take the negative values into account because they still provide a solution and you are looking for a general solution. The $2$ isn't there because they appear to have divided the whole general solution by $2$. This is allowed since all the constants are arbitrary, and this is just a general solution. This division is also what causes the $\frac12$ in front of the $A_0$. $\endgroup$ – John Doe May 4 '18 at 20:04
1
$\begingroup$

There is no problem. This, first, emphasizes that eigenvalue $\lambda_0$ has only one eigenfunction, all other eigenvalues have two.

The division by 2 is a convention: if you wrote just $A_0$ then the formulas for $A_0$ and $A_n$ are different whereas having $A_0/2$ yields that we can write $$ A_n=\frac{1}{l}\int_{-l}^{l} f(x)\cos \sqrt{\lambda_n} x\, dx,\quad n=0,1,2,\ldots $$

$\endgroup$

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.