Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably the second example here [1] for those curious (I think the integral of sin(x)*e^x dx is the only place I've seen this used, would love to know if there are other examples). [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_by_parts#Tabular...
This becomes much more transparent if you realize you're integrating Im(e^x * e^{ix}). And it's no longer a trick but a technique.
Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
101–110 of 122 posts
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#102One lesson academics should learn: pdf-naming-skills.pdf. I've been collecting interesting scientific papers and publications since early 2000 (I've a collection of 10,000 or so) and I've not yet seen a single academic, not even a computer scientist, who understands how to name your documents right so that when I download them I could quickly find them. I've to rename every single pdf. It's infuriating. Someone shoul…
I have an order of magnitude fewer docs that you; I can't imagine hand organizing that many!
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
For ODEs you can simply think of solving the autonomous system numerically. Since I have many numerical algorithms to solve such a system, solutions exist. Since (most of) those algorithms are totally deterministic and offer no choices anywhere along the way (except maybe for some initial conditions) the solutions are unique. For PDE's it's much more interesting, as the author points out.
I think the underlying issue is that the technical conditions guaranteeing for existence and uniqueness for ODEs (the Picard-Lindelof theorem) are so easy to satisfy (which is what guarantees that different numerical algorithms will give the same answer) that they're something most students are unlikely to encounter in practice. That said, I do think there is some pedagogical value in teaching existence/uniqueness ev…
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#104I couldn't agree with the last point more. > A course taught as a bag of tricks is devoid of educational value. One year later, the students will forget the tricks, most of which are useless anyway. The bag of tricks mentality is, in my opinion, a defeatist mentality...In an elementary course in differential equations, students should learn a few basic concepts that they will remember for the rest of their lives... I…
Two days later he had an explicit solution based on two really non-obvious (bizarre) substitutions. I came away very, very impressed. The guy earned a 'we are indebted to ...' footnote in the paper.
I guess the point is someone has to come up with the tricks.
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#105My major is computational math, from 15 years ago, from leading Russian university, so it is just anecdata, and by no means should be generalized. I absolutely love mathematics, for me it is the embodiment of pure beauty. Still, I positively, absolutely hated the sophomore course of ODEs. The way it was taught was extremely abstract: here is the equation, this is integration, this is separation, this is your SLP, now…
I hated ODEs until I took MIT's robotics course and had to solve non-linear ones using non-linear optimization techniques. Since then I love them ;-)
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#106...
> Most often, some student will retort with the dreaded question: “So what?”
Insecure snob.
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#107I couldn't agree with the last point more. > A course taught as a bag of tricks is devoid of educational value. One year later, the students will forget the tricks, most of which are useless anyway. The bag of tricks mentality is, in my opinion, a defeatist mentality...In an elementary course in differential equations, students should learn a few basic concepts that they will remember for the rest of their lives... I…
>I felt like it was nothing but a bag of tricks... had to substitute a "2" with "1/2 + 3/2". Many techniques in math are "tricks" like this. Think of solving a quadratic by completing the square, or integrating by substitution or integrating by partial fractions, etc. You could arrive at these techniques on your own, but that is a lot of trial-and-error, deep understanding of theory, and applying it, which all takes…
But Google is a better teacher of that kind of stuff than any professor can claim to be. If this is the kind of knowledge you pass on during education, it's basically worthless.
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#108Where can I find an expansion of the intuitive explanation given for integrating factors? > It is of the utmost importance to explain the relation between the solutions of the differential equation and the solutions of the system. The solutions of the system are trajectories, they are parametric curves endowed with a velocity given by the vector field. The solutions of the corresponding differential equation are inte…
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#109Where can I find an expansion of the intuitive explanation given for integrating factors? > It is of the utmost importance to explain the relation between the solutions of the differential equation and the solutions of the system. The solutions of the system are trajectories, they are parametric curves endowed with a velocity given by the vector field. The solutions of the corresponding differential equation are inte…
If you have an equation of the form dy/dx = f(x) and you want "solve" it, what you are typically looking for is to write y = g(x), right? In other words, the solution to this differential equation is some curve in the x-y plane. This applies more generally, e.g. to situations where you end up with an "implicit" solution like h(y) = g(x): you still get an equation relating x and y which can then be represented as some set of points in the x-y plane (the ones that satisfy that equation).
Now say f(x) happens to have the form a(x,y)/b(x,y). You can consider the system of two differential equations: dy/dt = a(x,y), dx/dt = b(x,y). Solving this system gives x and y as functions of t. Picking any particular value of t gives values of x and y, which gives you a point in the x-y plane. The first key point is that the set of points produced by this procedure as you plug in all possible values of t is exactly the set of points for which the h(y) = g(x) equation above holds. In other words, the solution to the two-equation system encapsulates all the information about the solution to the original equation.
The second key point is that the solution to the two-equation system has _more_ information than the solution to the original equation. In particular, it has the actual values of dx/dt and dy/dt for every given value of t, which don't correspond to anything in our original problem. Their _ratio_ does correspond to something in our original problem: the slope of the tangent line to the solution curve (dy/dx). But the exact values themselves are somewhat arbitrary, as long as their ratio is correct. Put another way, our original problem's solution is a curve in the x-y plane, while the solution of our two-equation system is a curve together with a description for how fast to move along it as t changes. That's the "velocity" bit in Rota's article.
OK, but if how fast we move along the curve doesn't really matter, maybe we can choose to move along it in a nice way that makes it particularly simple to figure out what the shape of the curve is. Our only constraint is that at any given point along the curve the ratio of dx/dt and dy/dt is fixed, because in our original problem we have a fixed dy/dx if we're given values of x and y. So if, at every point (x,y) we multiply dx/dt and dy/dt by the same number (which can depend on x and y) then we get a system of two equations that has different solutions for x and y as functions of t, but the graph of the resulting thing in the x-y plane still looks the same. That's the integrating factor bit; we just formalize it by saying that we multiply both dx/dt and dy/dt by the same function q(x,t), which is exactly what it means to multiply them both at every point by some number that might depend on that point.
The hard part, of course, is choosing a q(x,y) that makes things work out nicely and makes it easy to solve our two equations to get x(t) and y(t).
Here's a concrete example that might help:
Say dy/dx = x/y. We rewrite this in the form dy/dt = x, dx/dt = y. This isn't terribly convenient to solve, so we multiply by q(x,y) = 1/(2xy) to get a new system: dy/dt = 1/(2y), dx/dt = 1/(2x). At this point, maybe you just look at it and go, ah, y = sqrt(t + C1), x = sqrt(t + C2), or maybe you figure out some other way to get there. In any case, now you see that t + C1 = y^2, t + C2 = x^2, so x^2 - y^2 = C for some constant (C2-C1, but both are arbitrary, so this is just some single arbitrary constant). And that's your (implicit) solution for the original differential equation: a hyperbola, or more precisely a family of hyperbolas each of which satisfies the equation.
To illustrate the point about velocities, let's just consider C = 1, so x^2 - y^2 = 1. The point (sqrt(2), 1) lies on this curve. At this point, dy/dx = x/y = sqrt(2). On our original formulation of the parametric system, dy/dt = sqrt(2), dx/dt = 1 at this point. In our reformulation with the integrating factor, dy/dt = 1/2 and dx/dt = 1/(2*sqrt(2)). So the two formulations have us moving along the hyperbola at different speeds at this point as t changes, but they're moving along the same hyperbola.
Does that help at all?
Re: Ten lessons I wish I had learned before teaching differential equations (1997) [pdf]
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
How good of a computer user do you have to be to sort by modified date? :P
Lots of things can touch modification date. It's ironic, because professors and instructors often ask their students to name their research papers, essays, and projects with a well-defined, searchable naming scheme.