Are characteristics the only solution to the advection equation in 1+1D?
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
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
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
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
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
fluid-dynamics waves mathematics differential-equations
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:
Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.
Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.
Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.
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
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.
add a comment |
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:
Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.
Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.
Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:
Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.
Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.
Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:
Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.
Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.
Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.
Yes, it is the only solution. Hints for proof:
Go to lightcone coordinates: $x^pm~:=~x pm vt$.
Show that OP's eq. (1) in 1+1D becomes $fracpartial upartial x^+~=~0$.
Deduce that $u=u(x^-)$ is a function of $x^-$ only.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.
add a comment |
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.
The equation is linear, and the solution to a linear equation in one unknown is always unique.
answered Nov 9 at 15:24
Chester Miller
13.7k2623
13.7k2623
add a comment |
add a comment |
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%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
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
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