2

Let the trial solution of a differential equation of the form $\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}+a\frac{dx}{dt}+bx=0$ ($a,b$ are constants), be $x=e^{mt}$. If it turns out that the two roots of $m^2+am+b=0$ are the same i.e. $m_1=m_2$, the general solution cannot be obtained from $$x=c_1e^{m_1t}+c_2e^{m_2t}$$ by setting $m_1=m_2(=m)$. Instead the solution is $$x=(c_1+c_2t)e^{mt}$$ Why is that? How do we justify this solution or explain this?

JMP
  • 21,771
  • 1
    I asked a similar question a while back. Maybe the answers there can help you? – Arthur Mar 23 '22 at 04:58
  • Does it explain why setting $m_1=m_2$ in $x=c_1e^{m_1t}+c_2e^{m_2t}$ fail to give us the general solution? What goes wrong? – Solidification Mar 23 '22 at 05:07
  • It fails because suddenly there are additional solutions of the form $cte^{m_1t}$ that appear seemingly out of nowhere. The real question is where does that solution come from, and how could one discover that solution naturally? Which is close to what I asked back then. I can't judge for you whether the answers there help you. You have to check yourself. – Arthur Mar 23 '22 at 05:17

3 Answers3

5

Write the linear combination slightly differently $$ x(t)=c_1e^{m_1t}+c_2\frac{e^{m_2t}-e^{m_1t}}{m_2-m_1} $$ and check that for $m_1\ne m_2$ this indeed still parametrizes the full set of solutions. Now for $m_1\approx m_2$ the second term, by the mean value theorem or definition of the derivative, is close to $c_2te^{m_1t}$ as long as $|m_2-m_1|\,|t|\ll 1$.

In the limit case $m_1=m_2$ the above approximation turns into the actual solution.


To get such a parametrization more naturally, start from the symmetry that is inherent in the solution formula for the quadratic characteristic equation and set $m_{1,2}=m\pm n$. Then $$ x(t)=e^{mt}(c_1e^{nt}+c_2e^{-nt})=e^{mt}((c_1+c_2)\cosh(nt)+(c_1-c_2)\sinh(nt)) $$ It is the last term going to zero for $n\to 0$ that gives wildly varying coefficients. So scale it to something that is nearly invariant close to $t=0$ and switch parameters to $$ x(t)=e^{mt}\left(u\cosh(nt)+v\frac{\sinh(nt)}{n}\right). $$ This again has a good approximation by $e^{mt}(u+vt)$ for $|nt|\ll 1$.

Lutz Lehmann
  • 126,666
1

HINT:

Say your DE is $\frac{d^2 x}{d t^2} = 0$. The solutions are $c_1 + c_2 t$.

Now say your DE is $(\frac{d}{dt} - m)^2 x = 0$. Note that we are dealing with the differential operator $\frac{d}{dt} - m$ and its square. Now, we have

$$\frac{d}{dt} (e^{m t} x) = e^{m t} \frac{d x}{dt} + m e^{m t} x$$ that is $$(\frac{d}{dt} - m) (e^{m t} x) = e^{m t} \frac{d}{d t} x $$ and from here $$(\frac{d}{dt} - m)^k (e^{m t} x) = e^{m t} (\frac{d}{d t})^k x $$ for all $k\ge 1$.

Basically, the differential operators $\frac{d}{dt} - m$ and $\frac{d}{dt}$ are conjugate.

orangeskid
  • 53,909
0

Tracking what happens to the $te^{mt}$ term over the ODE,

$$\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}te^{mt} = \frac{dx}{dt}(mte^{mt} + e^{mt}) = m^2te^{mt} + 2me^{mt}$$

$$\frac{dx}{dt}te^{mt} = mte^{mt} + e^{mt}$$

Collecting the terms by $te^{mt}$ gives

$$m^2+am+b=0$$

and collecting the terms by $e^{mt}$ gives

$$2m+a=0$$

because $m$ is a double root, therefore the differential at $m$ is zero.

To finish, examine the cases for $t^ke^{mt}, k\ge2$ to conclude that this is all the solutions.

JMP
  • 21,771