Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I've been revising for 5 hours straight and for some reason a few little things have slipped me up:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    How is it that both of these MVPs can be rewritten in the forms they are given? I have thought a direct change of variables but maybe I am being silly, I haven't been able to get them. They make sense intuitvely but I cannot seem to do it mathematically.. I am probably missing something very obvious.

    EDIT: I just got the second MVP but still not the first one..

    Another question:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    what is the reason for taking the laplacian of the log of x?

    The proof goes on and it makes sense from there on but I just have no idea why the laplacian of log of x was chosen.

    Apologies if these seem like silly questions, there were things just skimmed over during lectures and I didn't think much of them at the time!

    Thank you for any help
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I am sort of guessing this:

    Let y = x + rn(\theta) where \theta \in [0,2 \pi]
    dy/d \theta = r(- \sin \theta, \cos \theta)

    dS_y = r \sqrt {(- \sin \theta)^2 + (\cos \theta)^2} d \theta

    So dS_y = r d \theta (using sin^2(x)+cos^2(x)=1) and the r will cancel out.

    For the laplacian question: see what conditions are needed (hence log can be used).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WannabeBeAST)
    EDIT: I just got the second MVP but still not the first one..
    The first is straightforward by noting that

    \displaystyle\int_C fds = \displaystyle\int_a^b f\left| \dfrac{d\mathbf{r}}{du}\right| du

    Where ds is the scalar line element defined via d\mathbf{r} = \hat{\mathbf{t}}ds and u parameterises the curve C s.t. a,b are the suitable limits.

    Another question:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    what is the reason for taking the laplacian of the log of x?

    The proof goes on and it makes sense from there on but I just have no idea why the laplacian of log of x was chosen.

    Apologies if these seem like silly questions, there were things just skimmed over during lectures and I didn't think much of them at the time!

    Thank you for any help
    I think it may be unclear because the key identity is written in an unhelpful way. Moreso than the divergence theorem, the intuition behind the proof really relies on Green's second identity (which is a corollary): For suitable functions f, g, we have (in the notation of your notes)

    \displaystyle\int_{\Omega_0} (f(x)\Delta{g(x)} - g(x)\Delta{f(x)})dx = \displaystyle\int_{\partial \Omega_0} (f(x)\nabla g(x) - g(x)\nabla f(x))\cdot \hat{n} dS(x)

    Looking at it from here and keeping in mind that you want to reduce to the first form of the mean value property, it's sensible to choose one of these to be u(x+y) - f, say. This leaves us with the choice of g and collapses our above identity to:

    \displaystyle\int_{\Omega_0} u(x+y)\Delta{g(y)} dy = \displaystyle\int_{\partial \Omega_0} u(x+y)\nabla g(y) \cdot \hat{n} dS(y) - \displaystyle\int_{\partial \Omega_0} g(y)\nabla u(x+y) \cdot \hat{n} dS(y)

    It's clear that if we force g be harmonic on \Omega_0 and constant on \partial \Omega_0, the LHS and the second integral on the RHS both vanish, leaving us with:

    \displaystyle\int_{\partial \Omega_0} u(x+y)\nabla g(y) \cdot \hat{n} dS(y) = 0

    Defining \Omega_0 as the proof suggests allows us to then see that, if \nabla g(y) \cdot \hat{n} is constant on the two boundaries of the annulus individually, the desired result will follow.

    Hence we require a solution to Laplace's equation with this set of Neumann boundary conditions. It turns out that g(s,\theta ) = \log s i.e. g(y) = \log |y| is the simplest such solution and hence the choice for this proof.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Make your revision easier

    Maths

    Maths Forum posting guidelines

    Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

    Equations

    How to use LaTex

    Writing equations the easy way

    Student revising

    Study habits of A* students

    Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

    Study Planner

    Create your own Study Planner

    Never miss a deadline again

    Polling station sign

    Thinking about a maths degree?

    Chat with other maths applicants

    Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.