Easier Ways to Find General Solutions of Higher Dimensional ODE's
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
We have often used in the 2x2 case the Jordan form of the matrix A (2x2) in the system X' = AX, which yields a nice solution with standard basis vectors, which we transpose by the transformation matrix T to get back the original ODE's general solution (assuming invertible T).
Now with 3x3 and above, calculating the inverse matrix becomes prohibitively tedious, and I wanted to see if there is a faster way when there are repeated eigenvalues.
Example: A = ((0,0,1),(0,1,0),(1,0,0)), then the eigenvalues are -1, 1, 1, and clearly because x_2' = x_2 (the y component), x_2(t) = c_2 * e^t. I'm not sure what to do next; I know often we "guess" a solution for the components and check, but I'm stuck here...
differential-equations
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
We have often used in the 2x2 case the Jordan form of the matrix A (2x2) in the system X' = AX, which yields a nice solution with standard basis vectors, which we transpose by the transformation matrix T to get back the original ODE's general solution (assuming invertible T).
Now with 3x3 and above, calculating the inverse matrix becomes prohibitively tedious, and I wanted to see if there is a faster way when there are repeated eigenvalues.
Example: A = ((0,0,1),(0,1,0),(1,0,0)), then the eigenvalues are -1, 1, 1, and clearly because x_2' = x_2 (the y component), x_2(t) = c_2 * e^t. I'm not sure what to do next; I know often we "guess" a solution for the components and check, but I'm stuck here...
differential-equations
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
We have often used in the 2x2 case the Jordan form of the matrix A (2x2) in the system X' = AX, which yields a nice solution with standard basis vectors, which we transpose by the transformation matrix T to get back the original ODE's general solution (assuming invertible T).
Now with 3x3 and above, calculating the inverse matrix becomes prohibitively tedious, and I wanted to see if there is a faster way when there are repeated eigenvalues.
Example: A = ((0,0,1),(0,1,0),(1,0,0)), then the eigenvalues are -1, 1, 1, and clearly because x_2' = x_2 (the y component), x_2(t) = c_2 * e^t. I'm not sure what to do next; I know often we "guess" a solution for the components and check, but I'm stuck here...
differential-equations
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
We have often used in the 2x2 case the Jordan form of the matrix A (2x2) in the system X' = AX, which yields a nice solution with standard basis vectors, which we transpose by the transformation matrix T to get back the original ODE's general solution (assuming invertible T).
Now with 3x3 and above, calculating the inverse matrix becomes prohibitively tedious, and I wanted to see if there is a faster way when there are repeated eigenvalues.
Example: A = ((0,0,1),(0,1,0),(1,0,0)), then the eigenvalues are -1, 1, 1, and clearly because x_2' = x_2 (the y component), x_2(t) = c_2 * e^t. I'm not sure what to do next; I know often we "guess" a solution for the components and check, but I'm stuck here...
differential-equations
differential-equations
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
asked Nov 25 at 5:16
MathGuyForLife
886
886
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22
add a comment |
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I'll just post what Moo explained above. The solution is similar format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues, because the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
$$ae^{-t}(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0)$$
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I'll just post what Moo explained above. The solution is similar format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues, because the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
$$ae^{-t}(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0)$$
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I'll just post what Moo explained above. The solution is similar format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues, because the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
$$ae^{-t}(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0)$$
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I'll just post what Moo explained above. The solution is similar format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues, because the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
$$ae^{-t}(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0)$$
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
I'll just post what Moo explained above. The solution is similar format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues, because the eigenvectors are linearly independent.
$$ae^{-t}(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0)$$
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
edited Nov 25 at 5:41
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
answered Nov 25 at 5:29
MathGuyForLife
886
886
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
add a comment |
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
1
1
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
Thank you, edited.
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:41
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012465%2feasier-ways-to-find-general-solutions-of-higher-dimensional-odes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
so then, is the solution just the same format as in the case of 3 distinct eigenvalues? i.e. ae^-t(-1,0,1)+be^t(1,0,1)+ce^t(0,1,0) ?
– MathGuyForLife
Nov 25 at 5:22