PDE 5 | Method of characteristics

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 20 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 111

  • @AinNoNey
    @AinNoNey 12 років тому +57

    I hate the fact that understanding it in my second language is lot easier than in my native one. Believe me or not, math in English seems much more acquirable. At least I don't fall asleep after 30 seconds. Cheers from Poland. You've just gone international ;)

    • @McSwagical
      @McSwagical 8 місяців тому

      hello from hk, china o/

  • @jeremybinagia
    @jeremybinagia 7 років тому +22

    Usually I don't like these types of videos since I prefer reading from a textbook, but this video was super clear. Every source I tried to read online for characteristic curves was just needlessly complicated and assumed too much prior knowledge. Well done!

  • @lejakke
    @lejakke 3 роки тому +5

    just discovered this and i did not expected this video to be already 9 years old, beautiful graphics and way of presentation

  • @guitarofwar4935
    @guitarofwar4935 7 років тому +15

    Absolutely loved this. The exercise at the end was so helpful for using the method of characteristics. No-one learns just by watching.

  • @bartoszdrzygaa3179
    @bartoszdrzygaa3179 7 місяців тому

    Just want to say, you are awesome. This is the best series on PDEs I've seen on YT. I love the way you use examples, like with a moving cart, to visualize what's behind the equations.

  • @elliemokhtari7700
    @elliemokhtari7700 10 років тому +6

    Your videos are awesome, I am graduate student and I use your videos for my PDE cours and I learn each and every of your videos, Thank you so much

  • @imagedezach
    @imagedezach 7 років тому +2

    Thank you for these videos on method of characteristics. Yours are the only ones I've found that explain this topic clearly and concisely.

  • @kenmcc85
    @kenmcc85 3 роки тому +3

    This is magic - thank-you for making it so much easier to understand than textbooks make it

  • @ammarshaikh876
    @ammarshaikh876 12 років тому +2

    Thank you! Your illustrations in the video about observer and the wave are helpful. Before, I was not able to understand what phenomena this PDE was describing

  • @DANISHKHAN-cv1ox
    @DANISHKHAN-cv1ox 5 років тому +2

    this is the only explanation which solved all my doubts. Finally understood the meaning of the phrase "solution propagates along characteristics"

  • @ZappelFly
    @ZappelFly 11 років тому +3

    du/dt + u du/dt=0 is the so-called burgers equation and it's well studied in every pde-textbook. For example Lawrence C. Evans - Partial Differential Equations

  • @123Handbuch
    @123Handbuch 6 років тому +2

    I think the initial condition should be written as u(x,0)=sin(x_0), no? You are using it at 14:31 as sin(x_0) - for me, x_0 describes a fixed x at t=0 whereas u(x,0)=sin(x) doesn't fix x.
    I currently think of it as u(x(t),0)=sin(x(t)) and so sin(x_0)=sin(x(0)), this also makes clear that the very last step, where we put x-ct into sin is derived form the fact that dx/dt=c. (Anyway, I like to be pedantic so I think I'll need to think some more about it, when is it actually x and when x(t))

  • @livpoolmad
    @livpoolmad 11 років тому +2

    I wasn't talking about burgers equation. What I was trying to say was with
    du/dt + c(t)du/dx=0 the constant is changing with time meaning equation 2 in the solution:
    du/dt=0 (1)
    dx/dt=c(t) (2)
    has to be solved numerically using eulers method or another technique (Runge Kutta etc).

  • @damgnj
    @damgnj 6 років тому +3

    I love when someone explain something in math easy, like in this video. Thanks!

  • @smath82
    @smath82 12 років тому +10

    This was helpful and also wonderful, really really well done. Thanks a million.

  • @hadadvitor
    @hadadvitor 12 років тому +2

    Extremely helpful, commutant! You have the best PDE videos in UA-cam! Thanks!

  • @bjar2
    @bjar2 10 років тому +29

    Great videos; well explained, easy to understand and good progress pace. Thank you! :-)

  • @TheYahya701
    @TheYahya701 12 років тому +3

    Nice lecture. BTW, which software did you use to write on the blackbaord?

  • @haniehsoleimani6096
    @haniehsoleimani6096 8 років тому +2

    helped me a lot, thanks. It is much clear than any text book explanation.

  • @wronski11
    @wronski11 5 місяців тому

    Isn't 4:22 to be a total derivative on the rhs and partials on the lhs.

  • @hikikomorihachiman7491
    @hikikomorihachiman7491 Рік тому

    Could you somebody explain the chain rule at 4:24 ?
    I watched chain rule and it’s derivating from outside to inside, right?
    So how come there’s a addition thing in there?

    • @afewofmyfavoritethings
      @afewofmyfavoritethings 9 місяців тому +1

      I think he actually makes a mistake here. If what he has there is true, since u_t is just another way to write du/dt, then you would be left with u_x*dx/dt = 0 since u_t would cancel from both sides of this equation.

    • @guilhermegouveialopes7170
      @guilhermegouveialopes7170 4 дні тому +1

      @@afewofmyfavoritethings you made a huge mistake there! You are confusing the total derivative with the partial derivative. Notice that he uses du/dt for the total derivative and u_t for the partial derivative. So du/dt means the derivative of the whole function u(x(t),t) in respect to t, while u_t is the partial derivative of the second member of u, which, by chain rule, would be (u_t dt/dt) and since dt/dt is one, you're left with only u_t

    • @afewofmyfavoritethings
      @afewofmyfavoritethings 7 годин тому

      @@guilhermegouveialopes7170 Thanks! Not sure how tired I must have been that day to completely miss that, but you’re definitely correct.

  • @superphilschneider
    @superphilschneider 3 роки тому +4

    Hi commutant, thanks for a very good video. Doing what you did in this video is not easy, so nice going. I'm trying to learn my engineering mathematics again, but this time properly, so videos like yours are very helpful. What happens in the original PDE when the wave propagation speed, c, is not a constant? If c depends only on time, t, then I think it's not so bad, but what about when c depends on x. Do you have a video for that?

  • @scfog90
    @scfog90 5 років тому +5

    Wow, what a great explanation. Somehow our professor made it impossible to understand

  • @SaiPraneeth21
    @SaiPraneeth21 7 років тому +9

    Excellent video, the it was smooth as butter to understand
    Thanks a lot.

  • @giovanbattistacavadini7706
    @giovanbattistacavadini7706 6 років тому +2

    Better expllained than in a Master Degree lecture at ETH Zürich which I took

  • @VicenteMReyes-vs9nh
    @VicenteMReyes-vs9nh 6 років тому +2

    You are a very good teacher/explainer/illustrator. Are you a mathematician or a physicist by formal training? Do you have a doctoral degree and are you a tenured faculty member at a college or university in the US? Thank you very much for posting these useful videos. More power to you.

  • @mohamedboushab5547
    @mohamedboushab5547 8 років тому +1

    thanks for your explanation. is it working just in linear PDI ?

  • @cristianegrossiferrarezzi1716
    @cristianegrossiferrarezzi1716 6 років тому +2

    Thanks a lot for the video. I was trying to understand this method for a long time and your explanation solved all of my doubts. I would be so thankful if you could make a video about Duhamel's Theorem. Thank you! ;)

  • @shahfuhaid
    @shahfuhaid 6 років тому

    11:37 shouldn’t it be f(x ⁰) instead of f(x)? Thanks a lot for making all this!

  • @AnnuFzd
    @AnnuFzd 9 років тому

    9:00 . You say " u is constant along the line ." It's not. u is only constant with respect to time. Thus, the surface that u represent can change it's height. But the heights once made would not change with time. Please Explain.

    • @username17234
      @username17234 8 років тому +2

      +Satyam Agrawal u is a function of 2 variables, which means you can plot it in a plane with the height or 3rd coordinate being the value of u. Along certain lines in the plane the height is constant, those lines with slope 1/c in this case.

  • @yinggling
    @yinggling 12 років тому +1

    When du/dt=1,u=t+A.
    Could you tell me what happened when du/dt=other number(like 1/2, 3 etc) or a function?

  • @panster7982
    @panster7982 12 років тому

    could you explain how u got at 04:13? How did the product rule suddenly come to the picture. I understand u are differentiating (x(t),t), but somehow I got lost at that point

  • @bassammkeh
    @bassammkeh 9 років тому +2

    du/dt = 1 along characteristics lines but in boundary condition u(x,0) = sin(x) --> du/dt = 0 how ???

  • @harryliu4907
    @harryliu4907 7 років тому +2

    This is a very enlightening method! Thanks for posting this question!

  • @lucascosta2338
    @lucascosta2338 8 років тому +10

    hey commutant, which book did you use to study PDEs??

    • @ddeakpeti
      @ddeakpeti 7 років тому +1

      Peter O'Neil, Beginning PDE: An Introdution to therory, 3rd Ed.

  • @ronitkumar5152
    @ronitkumar5152 10 років тому +1

    Suppose the initial condition is u(x,0)=U_0 then what would be u(x,t)?

  • @oTwOrDsNe
    @oTwOrDsNe 8 років тому

    Why do we never say anything about u_x? It seems like it is just treated as 0, but how do we arrive at this?

  • @Physiologist
    @Physiologist 3 роки тому

    Why is du/dt essentially equal to 1 in the first hint??

  • @arturo3511
    @arturo3511 Рік тому

    it seems this is true if we have u(x(t)) but here u(x,t) has an explicit dependence on t, so it's not necessarily u along a path. we could have u(x,t) = 2x(t)+t for example

  • @thecatsister3040
    @thecatsister3040 7 років тому +2

    I am confused by the initial condition, it says that when t=o, u=sin(x) NOT sin(x0). Could someone explain this because they are different initial value.

    • @pvaughn495
      @pvaughn495 7 років тому +1

      shorthand for saying u(x,0) = sin(x)

    • @stefanosm8223
      @stefanosm8223 2 роки тому

      x0=const.=x-ct and this is the solution of dx/dt=c .So as you see, sin(x0)=sin(x-ct). For every value of t, the x value is a dependent value so as x-ct=x0=const. So ,if t=0, x=x0 .

  • @mateusciola
    @mateusciola 9 років тому +2

    but if u(x,t) = t + sin(x-ct), then du/dt = -c.cos(x-ct) + 1, what is different than the initial condition du/dt = 1. Where am I mistaken??

    • @PIYUSHTAILORstillalive
      @PIYUSHTAILORstillalive 9 років тому +3

      +mateusciola when we take du/dt=1,we take at the point when t=0,and as for general case u(x,t)=t+sin(x-ct)..For more assistance see question ,it is written u(x,0)=sinx

    • @AnnuFzd
      @AnnuFzd 9 років тому

      +PIYUSH TAILOR . Sale Sab padh liya tune. !

    • @PIYUSHTAILORstillalive
      @PIYUSHTAILORstillalive 9 років тому

      +Satyam Agrawal ha ha ha...bhai bhai..

    • @antonispanayi7220
      @antonispanayi7220 8 років тому

      Satyam Agrawal

  • @Zwaks
    @Zwaks 5 років тому +1

    I was able to solve the Exercise at the end using the characteristic method. However, I still feel confused and don't know why?

    • @jeffreyseverino4486
      @jeffreyseverino4486 5 років тому

      I was also confused, but then i realized that du/dt = 1 -> du=dt, integrate both sides , you get u(x_0,t) = t - C, then apply initial conditions to see that x_0 = x at t=0 from x_0 = x-ct , and you also get C = sin(x_0) = sin(x), I use C he uses A, potato potato.

  • @SHONSL
    @SHONSL 8 років тому +1

    Ah yes, I appreciate the exercise at the end. I'm studying PDEs as much as I can before I take the class, and would love to be ahead. Thorough lesson. easiest subscription.

    • @reimannx33
      @reimannx33 3 роки тому +1

      Big deal! Stop desperately trying to fill your low self esteem by announcing such worthless details.

  • @olgahere
    @olgahere 8 років тому +2

    Love your explanation!

  • @livpoolmad
    @livpoolmad 11 років тому

    what if the constant is changing with time
    du/dt + v(t) du/dx = 0
    How would that be solved?

  • @davantiah
    @davantiah 13 років тому

    Thanks for all the help. Really appreciated. However, what would one do if given following transport equation:
    du/dt (x,t) + du/dx (x,t) = 0; x> 0; t>0;
    u(x,0)=0; x>0;
    u(0,t)=sin t : t>0
    I am slightly confused with how these two come together on the x-t plane and on the line x=t. Thanks

    • @stefanosm8223
      @stefanosm8223 2 роки тому

      You must solve it with Laplace transform. u(0,t)=sint becomes U(0,s)=1/(s^2-1) .You must also transform the p.d.e equation to Laplace. The answer : u(x,t)= δ(t-x) * sint = integral of 0 to t( δ(τ-x) sin(t-τ)dτ)

  • @rametsesam6925
    @rametsesam6925 3 роки тому

    I am struggling to solve an advection equation given by [ u_t + u_x = 0 ; u(0,t) = Sin 4pi t and u(x,0) = 0] . any tips?

  • @busracalsr2687
    @busracalsr2687 4 роки тому

    i cannot solve the question. can u help me please?
    Given the linear equation: Ux-Uy=0 with the initial conditions: x(0,s)=0, y(0,s)=s, u(0,s)=g(s) where g(s) is an arbitrary differentiable function.
    a) Write the Characterist equations: a(x,y,u)Ux+b(x,y,u)Uy=c(x,y,u)
    dx = a(x,y,u) (1) dy = b(x,y,u) (2) du = c(x,y,u) (3)
    dt dt dt
    b) Integrate equations (1-2), use the initial conditions and determine x and y interms of the parameters t and s, then inverting these, write t and s interms of x and y.
    c) Integrate equations (3), use the initial conditions and determine u interms of t and s and then write u interms of x and y:u(x,y)

  • @ZappelFly
    @ZappelFly 11 років тому

    Do you write with your mouse or is it some kind of e-board/pad?

  • @arminebner2846
    @arminebner2846 6 років тому

    good video. your curve red line describing x(t) does not match dx/dt =c, which is a more particular case.

  • @darkaliebaba99
    @darkaliebaba99 Рік тому

    Could someone clear a confusion up for me: Whats the difference between du/dt and u_t ? The way i interpret them is like du/dt = lim_{h->0} [u(x(t+h), t+h) - u(x(t), t)]/h, and u_t = lim_{h->0} [u(x(t), t+h) - u(x(t), t)]/h, But thats just my best guess, i dont know. Can someone explain to me if its not that and what it actually is?

  • @VamanNeurekar
    @VamanNeurekar 2 роки тому +1

    amazing explanation! Thanks a lot!!!

  • @MathStar100
    @MathStar100 8 років тому +1

    Very well explained. Thank you

  • @earendilthebright5402
    @earendilthebright5402 2 роки тому +1

    This was excellent, thankyou very much.

  • @jacobclaassen4709
    @jacobclaassen4709 7 років тому

    isn't the solution to the transport equation just some u(x-ct) because it's just a translation of a graph over time? I don't really see why we need PDE for this.

  • @manelsouguir8126
    @manelsouguir8126 5 років тому +1

    good explanation , thanks you for this great work !

  • @THIBS3393
    @THIBS3393 5 років тому

    omg too tired sorry for the post if the partial derivative of u with respect to t is 1 minus the product of the constant and the partial derivative of U with respect to x then it has to be 1 by eliminating the
    the minus minus the product of the constant and the partial derivative of U with respect to x but I kept thinking there is something off with my thinking.

  • @ZappelFly
    @ZappelFly 11 років тому +2

    Great job! It's a pleasure to watch you :)

  • @jeanconstantinople2328
    @jeanconstantinople2328 8 років тому

    does the fact that dx/dt = c mean that x and t aren't indepedent ?

    • @vibodhj349
      @vibodhj349 8 років тому

      Yes, indirectly dependent. It is really counter intuitive because there is no obvious entity which is changing the time coordinate when displacement of anything takes place.

  • @abdulrahmanmagdy6158
    @abdulrahmanmagdy6158 7 років тому

    Thanks from the bottom of my heart

  • @TheKoltang
    @TheKoltang 12 років тому

    I think the solution become u= 2t+sin(x-ct) right.

  • @andrec.2935
    @andrec.2935 Рік тому

    Excelente vídeo!

  • @ankurc
    @ankurc 7 років тому

    hello commutant, you don't discuss the way to solve PDE this way: dx/something=dy/something=dz/something?? I can't see it anywhere. My teacher uses this to solve PDE in class and he doesn't explain anything, So I'm not sure whether I should continue with your videos series or not? Please help. I'm new to PDE! :-( I really love your videos as it is like Khan Academy but I'm not sure whether it has everything I need or not?

    • @ankurc
      @ankurc 7 років тому

      沈轲 so does he discuss the dx/p dx/q dx/z method in his PDE video series? Don't call it " my ways " friend, I don't have much idea about it I saw my teacher do it at school that's it. :-P

  • @reemreem7043
    @reemreem7043 4 роки тому

    I am looking for tutor in pde

  • @chendian-jing6037
    @chendian-jing6037 4 роки тому +1

    Great! Very simply and conceptually introduce PDE

  • @chigeh
    @chigeh 5 років тому

    Wait but what is C?

  • @christianibron
    @christianibron 4 роки тому +1

    Great stuff!

  • @starship_01
    @starship_01 12 років тому

    what if f(x)=0??

  • @cyberdarknes
    @cyberdarknes 6 років тому +1

    thank you very much! Great video!

  • @johnfox17
    @johnfox17 13 років тому +1

    Thank you! This was very helpful!

  • @shivakumarcd
    @shivakumarcd 10 місяців тому

    at 6:26 youtube stat shows highest watched!!! so accurate

    • @shivakumarcd
      @shivakumarcd 10 місяців тому

      instead of f(x-ct) if we use U_0(x-ct) it may be more convenient.. as my professor did..

  • @THIBS3393
    @THIBS3393 5 років тому

    I missed why dU/dt = 1

  • @MileeWilson
    @MileeWilson 9 років тому

    Really wish you could tutor me.

  • @TheKoltang
    @TheKoltang 12 років тому

    sorry if du/dt=2 solution should be u= 2t+sin(x-ct)

  • @22Kyu
    @22Kyu 12 років тому +1

    This is Soo Good :) Thanks commutant!

  • @matthewblom1620
    @matthewblom1620 2 роки тому

    Very nice video

  • @sunildhaka4528
    @sunildhaka4528 6 років тому

    JUST Awesome Buddy!! Keep it up ##$$

  • @drivetobucees2061
    @drivetobucees2061 3 роки тому

    commutant really took us to the hood with this one

  • @UnforsakenXII
    @UnforsakenXII 6 років тому

    Thanks broseph.

  • @DennisHerman-p7y
    @DennisHerman-p7y 2 місяці тому

    1957 Lenny Rapids

  • @Postermaestro
    @Postermaestro 6 років тому

    good stuff

  • @johnstfleur3987
    @johnstfleur3987 2 роки тому

    R=1/2.

  • @curtpiazza1688
    @curtpiazza1688 Рік тому

    Great!

  • @yinggling
    @yinggling 12 років тому

    Thanks :)

  • @mickolesmana5899
    @mickolesmana5899 4 роки тому

    I clicked this video because I have a question. Leave with many more questions.

  • @phantom4902
    @phantom4902 2 роки тому

    goat

  • @cookrileyw
    @cookrileyw Рік тому

    I have generally liked most of your videos so far, but this was sloppy, I would like to note that both of your so-called hints are vital revelations needed to understand the concept. And you never explain how du/dt some how implies u=t+a? Moreover, why is (a) somehow sin(×0). In the previous section, all you stated was that u(x,t) = f(x-ct) given the transport equation and that u(x,0)=0. This is simply not enough information to gain any insight.

  • @caslu6578
    @caslu6578 4 роки тому

    not clear at all

  • @DelphianSociety
    @DelphianSociety 11 років тому

    Oh, come on. You're telling me that you are an MIT chemical engineering GRAD student and you couldn't solve that trivial exercise in an instant? You're bullshitting.