Partial Differential Equations - II. Separation of Variables

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 19 сер 2024
  • I introduce the physicist's workhorse technique for solving partial differential equations: separation of variables.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 34

  • @gregmagdits6421
    @gregmagdits6421 3 роки тому +25

    This video clarified a technique that was being used in a book, which I was trying for days to figure out how it worked. Thank you for sharing.

  • @benschauer5935
    @benschauer5935 3 роки тому +8

    Thank you so much. I was deriving an equation for a PIAB in three dimensions (cartesian coordinates) for my pchem midterm tonight and this concept was honestly the hardest part.

  • @the1111code
    @the1111code 6 місяців тому

    Great work, love your channel. I’m a 50 yo BSEE and you’ve helped me keep my gears greased. Thank you Sam! 🙏

    • @SamGralla
      @SamGralla  6 місяців тому

      awesome, that's great to hear!

  • @geordieshawstewart6058
    @geordieshawstewart6058 3 роки тому +6

    Excellent explaination, first time this makes sense to me

  • @dontsmackdafish3771
    @dontsmackdafish3771 3 роки тому +2

    Griffiths QM chapter 2.1, A man of culture I see

  • @kamalgasser6365
    @kamalgasser6365 3 роки тому +4

    Thanks a lot cleary explained it!! Really awesome

  • @raphael596
    @raphael596 2 роки тому

    Sam, you're a star. Do you know that. Thanks a lot for you eloquence in explaining this.

  • @user-lz1yz1rx4x
    @user-lz1yz1rx4x 2 роки тому

    Hey king you dropped this 👑

  • @joshuawatt7028
    @joshuawatt7028 3 роки тому +3

    Amazing, thanks!

  • @Demlab11
    @Demlab11 2 роки тому

    you just saved me from headache.

  • @ricardosousa4693
    @ricardosousa4693 7 місяців тому

    Thanks a lot. really.

  • @user-xl1ig1bn6i
    @user-xl1ig1bn6i 7 місяців тому

    Great

  • @IbrahimDayax
    @IbrahimDayax 3 роки тому

    Amazing video

  • @akilarajagopalan6584
    @akilarajagopalan6584 3 роки тому

    Awesome man !

  • @bengisu4592
    @bengisu4592 2 роки тому

    5:36 wow thank yoou so much! Now I got it

    • @SamGralla
      @SamGralla  2 роки тому +1

      So glad it was helpful, thanks!

  • @shivangsingh5834
    @shivangsingh5834 3 роки тому +1

    Sam please 🙏 upload more videos

  • @zaidali12
    @zaidali12 2 роки тому

    May god bless you

  • @krabix1855
    @krabix1855 2 роки тому +3

    Great video, thankyou. I'm a bit confused on how you got the final equations, at 8:10 onwards though?

    • @jordanlaforce2370
      @jordanlaforce2370 Рік тому +1

      Probably a little late now but anyways. It’s an ordinary differential equation in which case you are just looking for a X(x) that relates to it’s derivatives. In this situation it is not too hard to see that sin and cos are heavily related to their second derivatives. They are just the negatives, so if you plug in either sin or cos for X(x) you’ll see it works out however using just one isn’t the whole answer. Hence why he uses both sin and cos with an arbitrary constant “a”,”b” this allows for all solutions to be covered in the singular answer. The reason this works is because the sum of two solutions to an ODE is in itself a solution to the same ODE. That proof has to do with some linear algebra but I hope this helps.

    • @ricardosousa4693
      @ricardosousa4693 7 місяців тому

      @@jordanlaforce2370 Probablya to late now but anyways. You get the sin cos solution by taking the test function e^{lambda * x}. When solving for your constant you get a complex solution and use eulers identity which gives a cos and sin solution.

  • @ashishkumarsharma1323
    @ashishkumarsharma1323 3 роки тому

    Thanks a lot

  • @kina4288
    @kina4288 3 роки тому

    a boon. thanks mate

  • @presidentevil9951
    @presidentevil9951 2 роки тому

    how would you do non-homogenic?
    also
    how would you do non-separable?

  • @amjeda.a.7415
    @amjeda.a.7415 2 роки тому

    You're 👍

  • @cuberkahmin42
    @cuberkahmin42 3 роки тому

    Im sorry, may i ask something? Why you choose -lambda^2 as a constany, which is the constant is negatif. Why you not choose a constant positif or constanta 0, please tell me why? Thx before

    • @j.pesquera
      @j.pesquera 2 роки тому

      Because when you find the general solution of the two ODE's you have to find the roots of the equations by square rooting and if it's just lambda or k instead of lambda^2 or k^2 you end up with a more complicated square root problem. It just easier to work with k^2 or lambda^2, than k or lambda.

    • @diegofutgol87
      @diegofutgol87 2 роки тому

      @@j.pesquera Can we use lambda as a constant too?

    • @j.pesquera
      @j.pesquera 2 роки тому +1

      @@diegofutgol87 Yes, lambda is a constant.

  • @casuallycasualty4933
    @casuallycasualty4933 2 роки тому

    why did you say that the constant was -k^2 ?

    • @SamGralla
      @SamGralla  2 роки тому +2

      The constant can be named anything you want. In this case, I knew that eventually I wanted solutions like sin(kx) with k real. In practice doing it yourself, you would likely first name the constant "C" or something and then realize later that sqrt(-C) is what appears naturally in your solutions. So you would rename it then.

    • @casuallycasualty4933
      @casuallycasualty4933 2 роки тому

      @@SamGralla ah ok thank you!