# Differential equations help!

Watch
#1
https://isaacphysics.org/questions/m...1-73c31f67f288

I’m so lost, I haven’t a clue of where to start. There are so many variables and I haven’t a clue what each means.
0
8 months ago
#2
(Original post by Jsmithx)
https://isaacphysics.org/questions/m...1-73c31f67f288

I’m so lost, I haven’t a clue of where to start. There are so many variables and I haven’t a clue what each means.
What are the original equations you're starting with? This looks just like a change of variable and (possible) application of the chain rule.
0
8 months ago
#3
(Original post by Jsmithx)
https://isaacphysics.org/questions/maths_ch7_5_q5?board=d5187ecf-0f18-4b25-82d1-73c31f67f288

I’m so lost, I haven’t a clue of where to start. There are so many variables and I haven’t a clue what each means.
For the number of weed , the rate at which it changes over time is given by

where is the number of grass carp which predate upon this grass. The constant denotes the rate at which the weed grows. More weed means more growth. The second term describes the rate of 'death' for this weed. It depends on the constant , and effectively the number of predators , as well as the number of weed .

Note that if increases, it means more predators about hence a decrease in weed growth. Also, if increases, weeds compete against each other for nutrients. So the entire negative effect is bunched up into one term.

For the carps, the ODE is

where are constants of growth and death respectively.

Currently, these models are dimensional. Is the number of weed / carps in hundreds? Thousands? Millions??? Are they densities per some volume of space?

We can bring these models down via a process called non-dimensionalisation whereby we simply scale the variables (in this case f,c,t) in such a way as to eliminate as many constants as possible.

In your link, time is brought down via . This means that we can simply divide our equations through by the constant and obtain

We can also scale and where are dimensional constants (for us to rewrite in terms of the known constants), and are dimensionless variables.

Substituting these in yields

We can bring the coefficient of in the first eqn down to if we impose that .

We can also choose in order to bring the coefficient of in the second eqn down to .

This leaves us with

whereby we can combine the ratio into a single constant .

Thus, via nondimensionalisation, we have reduced the number of constants in our model down from 4 to only 1. The leftover variables z,y,u do not have any dimensions and can therefore be treated on level ground without having to worry about dimensions and their scaling factors.
Last edited by RDKGames; 8 months ago
0
#4
(Original post by RDKGames)
For the number of weed , the rate at which it changes over time is given by

where is the number of grass carp which predate upon this grass. The constant denotes the rate at which the weed grows. More weed means more growth. The second term describes the rate of 'death' for this weed. It depends on the constant , and effectively the number of predators , as well as the number of weed .

Note that if increases, it means more predators about hence a decrease in weed growth. Also, if increases, weeds compete against each other for nutrients. So the entire negative effect is bunched up into one term.

For the carps, the ODE is

where are constants of growth and death respectively.

Currently, these models are dimensional. Is the number of weed / carps in hundreds? Thousands? Millions??? Are they densities per some volume of space?

We can bring these models down via a process called non-dimensionalisation whereby we simply scale the variables (in this case f,c,t) in such a way as to eliminate as many constants as possible.

In your link, time is brought down via . This means that we can simply divide our equations through by the constant and obtain

We can also scale and where are dimensional constants (for us to rewrite in terms of the known constants), and are dimensionless variables.

Substituting these in yields

We can bring the coefficient of in the first eqn down to if we impose that .

We can also choose in order to bring the coefficient of in the second eqn down to .

This leaves us with

whereby we can combine the ratio into a single constant .

Thus, via nondimensionalisation, we have reduced the number of constants in our model down from 4 to only 1. The leftover variables z,y,u do not have any dimensions and can therefore be treated on level ground without having to worry about dimensions and their scaling factors.
Brilliant, ur an angel! On part E I think I’ve got the ans but it says the dimensions are wrong. u=at butt u/t isn’t allowed either
0
X

new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

### See more of what you like onThe Student Room

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

### Poll

Join the discussion

#### Who is winning Euro 2020

France (113)
27.56%
England (143)
34.88%
Belgium (31)
7.56%
Germany (41)
10%
Spain (9)
2.2%
Italy (34)
8.29%
Netherlands (14)
3.41%
Other (Tell us who) (25)
6.1%