Given the differential equation $dy/dt = (y + t)^2$, we can apply the u-substitution $u = y + t$ to arrive at the separable differential equation $du/dt = u^2 + 1$. This separates to $1/(u^2 + 1)\ du = dt$ which integrates to (EDIT: As LutzL has pointed out, I integrated incorrectly. However, correcting it would eclipse potentially interesting part of the question, so I'll leave the mistake) $u^2 + 1 - Ce^t = 0$. Reverting the substitution yields $y^2 + 2ty + t^2 + 1 - Ce^t = 0$. Note that $y$ is a dependent variable, $t$ is the independent variable, and $C$ is an arbitrary constant.

Is it legal to proceed via the quadratic formula, using the appropriate expressions in terms of $t$ as coefficients? This would look like $y = (-(2t) ± \sqrt{(2t)^2 - 4(1)(t^2 + 1 - Ce^t)})\ /\ 2(1)$, which works out to $y = -t ± \sqrt{Ce^t - 1}$. However, this practice feels a bit suspect, since in other instances of applying the quadratic formula, there is no dependency between the variable and its coefficients, whereas here there is. Is this a legal and correct approach to the problem?

Secondly, suppose a similar problem yielded $y^2 + 2ty + t^2 + 1 − Ce^y = 0$, where $y$ is still a dependent variable, $t$ is still the independent variable, and $C$ is still an arbitrary constant. Would it be legal to solve for $t$ using the quadratic formula using the appropriate expressions in terms of $y$ as coefficients?


2 Answers 2


Your solution is wrong as $$ \int\frac{du}{1+u^2}=\arctan(u), $$ so that $$ u=\tan(t+c),~~ y=\tan(t+c)-t. $$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Darn, thanks for catching that. :P I'm going to leave the mistake as is with a note, as correcting it would be harmful to the rest of the question. $\endgroup$
    – user10478
    Nov 28, 2018 at 21:19

User Lutzl has addressed an error in the set-up of your question. But in answer to the question itself, yes, you can apply the quadratic formula anytime you have a quadratic expression, so $y^2+2ty+t^2+1-Ce^t=0$ implies $y=-t\pm\sqrt{Ce^t-1}$ and $y^2+2ty+t^2+1-Ce^y=0$ implies $t=-y\pm\sqrt{Ce^y-1}$ (the key difference being that you're hard pressed to invert the expression $-y\pm\sqrt{Ce^y-1}$ to get an explicit formula for $y$ as a function of $t$). For that matter, it's even OK (if pointless) to say

$$y^2+2ty+t^2+1-Ce^y=0\implies y=-t\pm\sqrt{Ce^y-1}$$

All you're really doing in any of these is saying

$$y^2+2ty+t^2=whatever\implies (y+t)^2=whatever\implies y+t=\pm\sqrt{whatever}$$

(where that whatever better be nonnegative, unless you're prepared to deal with complex numbers).


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .