Are characteristics the only solution to the advection equation in 1+1D?









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












I'm currently reading about fluid dynamics and the Riemann problem, and a very commonly used equation to introduce the topic is the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficient $v$:



$$ fracpartial upartial t + v fracpartial upartial x = 0tag1$$



for which a solution is
$$ u(x,t) = u(x-vt, 0) = u_0(x-vt) $$
where $u_0 = u(t=0)$ is some initial condition.



This can be easily derived using the method of separation of variables: Let $u(x,t) = f(x)g(y)$.
Then
$$ fracpartial upartial t = f(x) fracpartial gpartial t$$



$$ fracpartial upartial x = g(t) fracpartial fpartial x
$$

Inserting into the advection equation and restructuring a little, we get



$$frac1g fracpartial gpartial t = frac1ffracpartial fpartial x = -lambda $$



where $lambda$ is some constant. Solving each equation separately gives us



$$ g = K_1 e^-lambda v t $$
$$ f = K_2 e^lambda x $$
$$ Rightarrow u(x,t) = fg = K e^lambda (x - vt) $$



with $K_1$, $K_2$ and $K=K_1 K_2$ are constants stemming from integration.
With
$$u_0 = u(x,t=0) = K e^lambda x$$
one can easily see that the solution can be expressed as
$$u(x,t) = u_0(x-vt)$$



So far, so good. Here's my question: Is that the only solution of the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficients? Is there a proof that this is the only solution?










share|cite|improve this question























  • I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 9 at 17:19











  • Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
    – Kyle Kanos
    Nov 10 at 18:04














up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












I'm currently reading about fluid dynamics and the Riemann problem, and a very commonly used equation to introduce the topic is the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficient $v$:



$$ fracpartial upartial t + v fracpartial upartial x = 0tag1$$



for which a solution is
$$ u(x,t) = u(x-vt, 0) = u_0(x-vt) $$
where $u_0 = u(t=0)$ is some initial condition.



This can be easily derived using the method of separation of variables: Let $u(x,t) = f(x)g(y)$.
Then
$$ fracpartial upartial t = f(x) fracpartial gpartial t$$



$$ fracpartial upartial x = g(t) fracpartial fpartial x
$$

Inserting into the advection equation and restructuring a little, we get



$$frac1g fracpartial gpartial t = frac1ffracpartial fpartial x = -lambda $$



where $lambda$ is some constant. Solving each equation separately gives us



$$ g = K_1 e^-lambda v t $$
$$ f = K_2 e^lambda x $$
$$ Rightarrow u(x,t) = fg = K e^lambda (x - vt) $$



with $K_1$, $K_2$ and $K=K_1 K_2$ are constants stemming from integration.
With
$$u_0 = u(x,t=0) = K e^lambda x$$
one can easily see that the solution can be expressed as
$$u(x,t) = u_0(x-vt)$$



So far, so good. Here's my question: Is that the only solution of the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficients? Is there a proof that this is the only solution?










share|cite|improve this question























  • I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 9 at 17:19











  • Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
    – Kyle Kanos
    Nov 10 at 18:04












up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1






1





I'm currently reading about fluid dynamics and the Riemann problem, and a very commonly used equation to introduce the topic is the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficient $v$:



$$ fracpartial upartial t + v fracpartial upartial x = 0tag1$$



for which a solution is
$$ u(x,t) = u(x-vt, 0) = u_0(x-vt) $$
where $u_0 = u(t=0)$ is some initial condition.



This can be easily derived using the method of separation of variables: Let $u(x,t) = f(x)g(y)$.
Then
$$ fracpartial upartial t = f(x) fracpartial gpartial t$$



$$ fracpartial upartial x = g(t) fracpartial fpartial x
$$

Inserting into the advection equation and restructuring a little, we get



$$frac1g fracpartial gpartial t = frac1ffracpartial fpartial x = -lambda $$



where $lambda$ is some constant. Solving each equation separately gives us



$$ g = K_1 e^-lambda v t $$
$$ f = K_2 e^lambda x $$
$$ Rightarrow u(x,t) = fg = K e^lambda (x - vt) $$



with $K_1$, $K_2$ and $K=K_1 K_2$ are constants stemming from integration.
With
$$u_0 = u(x,t=0) = K e^lambda x$$
one can easily see that the solution can be expressed as
$$u(x,t) = u_0(x-vt)$$



So far, so good. Here's my question: Is that the only solution of the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficients? Is there a proof that this is the only solution?










share|cite|improve this question















I'm currently reading about fluid dynamics and the Riemann problem, and a very commonly used equation to introduce the topic is the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficient $v$:



$$ fracpartial upartial t + v fracpartial upartial x = 0tag1$$



for which a solution is
$$ u(x,t) = u(x-vt, 0) = u_0(x-vt) $$
where $u_0 = u(t=0)$ is some initial condition.



This can be easily derived using the method of separation of variables: Let $u(x,t) = f(x)g(y)$.
Then
$$ fracpartial upartial t = f(x) fracpartial gpartial t$$



$$ fracpartial upartial x = g(t) fracpartial fpartial x
$$

Inserting into the advection equation and restructuring a little, we get



$$frac1g fracpartial gpartial t = frac1ffracpartial fpartial x = -lambda $$



where $lambda$ is some constant. Solving each equation separately gives us



$$ g = K_1 e^-lambda v t $$
$$ f = K_2 e^lambda x $$
$$ Rightarrow u(x,t) = fg = K e^lambda (x - vt) $$



with $K_1$, $K_2$ and $K=K_1 K_2$ are constants stemming from integration.
With
$$u_0 = u(x,t=0) = K e^lambda x$$
one can easily see that the solution can be expressed as
$$u(x,t) = u_0(x-vt)$$



So far, so good. Here's my question: Is that the only solution of the 1+1D advection equation with constant coefficients? Is there a proof that this is the only solution?







fluid-dynamics waves mathematics differential-equations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 9 at 17:45









Qmechanic

99.3k121781108




99.3k121781108










asked Nov 9 at 12:20









lemdan

949




949











  • I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 9 at 17:19











  • Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
    – Kyle Kanos
    Nov 10 at 18:04
















  • I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 9 at 17:19











  • Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
    – Kyle Kanos
    Nov 10 at 18:04















I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
– AccidentalFourierTransform
Nov 9 at 17:19





I voted to migrate this to Mathematics.
– AccidentalFourierTransform
Nov 9 at 17:19













Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
– Kyle Kanos
Nov 10 at 18:04




Fluid Dynamics and solutions thereof may require maths, but certainly is a physics question...
– Kyle Kanos
Nov 10 at 18:04










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote



accepted










Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:



  1. Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.


  2. Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.


  3. Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
    – lemdan
    Nov 9 at 14:12










  • There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
    – Qmechanic
    Nov 9 at 17:44


















up vote
2
down vote













The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.






share|cite|improve this answer




















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "151"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f439877%2fare-characteristics-the-only-solution-to-the-advection-equation-in-11d%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted










    Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:



    1. Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.


    2. Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.


    3. Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
      – lemdan
      Nov 9 at 14:12










    • There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
      – Qmechanic
      Nov 9 at 17:44















    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted










    Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:



    1. Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.


    2. Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.


    3. Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
      – lemdan
      Nov 9 at 14:12










    • There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
      – Qmechanic
      Nov 9 at 17:44













    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted






    Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:



    1. Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.


    2. Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.


    3. Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:



    1. Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.


    2. Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.


    3. Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Nov 9 at 17:45

























    answered Nov 9 at 12:34









    Qmechanic

    99.3k121781108




    99.3k121781108











    • I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
      – lemdan
      Nov 9 at 14:12










    • There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
      – Qmechanic
      Nov 9 at 17:44

















    • I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
      – lemdan
      Nov 9 at 14:12










    • There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
      – Qmechanic
      Nov 9 at 17:44
















    I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
    – lemdan
    Nov 9 at 14:12




    I see that using $fracpartial upartial x^+ = 0$ implies that $u = u(x^ -)$, but I don't see how that excludes any other solution?
    – lemdan
    Nov 9 at 14:12












    There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
    – Qmechanic
    Nov 9 at 17:44





    There are only 2 coordinates $(x^+,x^-)$ in 1+1D and $u$ cannot depend on $x^+$. So the above conclusion follows.
    – Qmechanic
    Nov 9 at 17:44











    up vote
    2
    down vote













    The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 9 at 15:24









        Chester Miller

        13.7k2623




        13.7k2623



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f439877%2fare-characteristics-the-only-solution-to-the-advection-equation-in-11d%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to how show current date and time by default on contact form 7 in WordPress without taking input from user in datetimepicker

            Syphilis

            Darth Vader #20