Showing that the energy of the wave equation in $mathbb R^d$ is constant











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Exercise on Stein's/Sharkachi book chapter 6:




Let $u(x, t)$ be a smooth solution of the wave equation and let $E(t)$ denote the energy of this wave
$$E(t) = int_{mathbb R^d} bigg|frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial t}bigg|^2+sum_{j=1}^d int_{mathbb R^d}bigg | frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial x_j}bigg |^2 dx.$$
We have seen that $E(t)$ is constant using Plancherel’s formula. One can give an alternate proof
of this fact by differentiating the integral with respect to $t$ and showing that $frac{dE}{dt} = 0.$




I remember that when we were in the 1-dimensional case, to prove a similar formula (which didn't involved modules back then), we had to multiply $u_{tt}= u_{xx}$ by $u_t$, integrate with respect to $x$ and then realize integration by parts. Noticing that $1/2(u_t^2)_t = u_{tt}u_t $ and doing similarly for $u_{xx}u_t$, we would arrive that: $frac{d}{dt}(1/2int u_t^2dx+1/2int u_x^2dx ) =0 $ which implies the conservation of energy.



So the hint given for the problem in $mathbb R^d$ is the same: use integration by parts. But I dunno exactly what is the d-dimensional analog of integration by parts. How can I solve this problem?










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite












    Exercise on Stein's/Sharkachi book chapter 6:




    Let $u(x, t)$ be a smooth solution of the wave equation and let $E(t)$ denote the energy of this wave
    $$E(t) = int_{mathbb R^d} bigg|frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial t}bigg|^2+sum_{j=1}^d int_{mathbb R^d}bigg | frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial x_j}bigg |^2 dx.$$
    We have seen that $E(t)$ is constant using Plancherel’s formula. One can give an alternate proof
    of this fact by differentiating the integral with respect to $t$ and showing that $frac{dE}{dt} = 0.$




    I remember that when we were in the 1-dimensional case, to prove a similar formula (which didn't involved modules back then), we had to multiply $u_{tt}= u_{xx}$ by $u_t$, integrate with respect to $x$ and then realize integration by parts. Noticing that $1/2(u_t^2)_t = u_{tt}u_t $ and doing similarly for $u_{xx}u_t$, we would arrive that: $frac{d}{dt}(1/2int u_t^2dx+1/2int u_x^2dx ) =0 $ which implies the conservation of energy.



    So the hint given for the problem in $mathbb R^d$ is the same: use integration by parts. But I dunno exactly what is the d-dimensional analog of integration by parts. How can I solve this problem?










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite











      Exercise on Stein's/Sharkachi book chapter 6:




      Let $u(x, t)$ be a smooth solution of the wave equation and let $E(t)$ denote the energy of this wave
      $$E(t) = int_{mathbb R^d} bigg|frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial t}bigg|^2+sum_{j=1}^d int_{mathbb R^d}bigg | frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial x_j}bigg |^2 dx.$$
      We have seen that $E(t)$ is constant using Plancherel’s formula. One can give an alternate proof
      of this fact by differentiating the integral with respect to $t$ and showing that $frac{dE}{dt} = 0.$




      I remember that when we were in the 1-dimensional case, to prove a similar formula (which didn't involved modules back then), we had to multiply $u_{tt}= u_{xx}$ by $u_t$, integrate with respect to $x$ and then realize integration by parts. Noticing that $1/2(u_t^2)_t = u_{tt}u_t $ and doing similarly for $u_{xx}u_t$, we would arrive that: $frac{d}{dt}(1/2int u_t^2dx+1/2int u_x^2dx ) =0 $ which implies the conservation of energy.



      So the hint given for the problem in $mathbb R^d$ is the same: use integration by parts. But I dunno exactly what is the d-dimensional analog of integration by parts. How can I solve this problem?










      share|cite|improve this question













      Exercise on Stein's/Sharkachi book chapter 6:




      Let $u(x, t)$ be a smooth solution of the wave equation and let $E(t)$ denote the energy of this wave
      $$E(t) = int_{mathbb R^d} bigg|frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial t}bigg|^2+sum_{j=1}^d int_{mathbb R^d}bigg | frac{partial u(x,t)}{partial x_j}bigg |^2 dx.$$
      We have seen that $E(t)$ is constant using Plancherel’s formula. One can give an alternate proof
      of this fact by differentiating the integral with respect to $t$ and showing that $frac{dE}{dt} = 0.$




      I remember that when we were in the 1-dimensional case, to prove a similar formula (which didn't involved modules back then), we had to multiply $u_{tt}= u_{xx}$ by $u_t$, integrate with respect to $x$ and then realize integration by parts. Noticing that $1/2(u_t^2)_t = u_{tt}u_t $ and doing similarly for $u_{xx}u_t$, we would arrive that: $frac{d}{dt}(1/2int u_t^2dx+1/2int u_x^2dx ) =0 $ which implies the conservation of energy.



      So the hint given for the problem in $mathbb R^d$ is the same: use integration by parts. But I dunno exactly what is the d-dimensional analog of integration by parts. How can I solve this problem?







      pde






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 19 at 18:22









      math.h

      1,107517




      1,107517






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          This is a typical energy method approach to use this to show the wave equation have but one solution. Rewrite your integral as



          $$E(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}^2 + |nabla u|^2 dx$$



          Then



          $$E'(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} 2u_{t}u_{tt} + 2(nabla u cdot nabla u_t) dx$$



          Here is the step where IBP is performed. Since you're curious, in higher dimension, the formula is



          $$int_U u_{x_{i}}v dx = -int_U uv_{x_{i}}dx + int_{partial U}uvnu^{i} dS$$



          for $i = 1,2,...n$ and $nu^i$ is the $ith$ component of the outward pointing unit normal vector of $U$, an open set bounded in $mathbb{R}^n$. Applying it here we get



          $$int_{mathbb{R}^d}nabla u cdot nabla u_t ,dx = -int_{mathbb{R}^d}u_t Delta u , dx$$



          since the boundary of $Bbb{R}^n$ is empty. Hence



          $$E'(t) = 2int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}(u_{tt} - Delta u) dx = 0$$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
            – math.h
            Nov 20 at 11:42










          • Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
            – DaveNine
            Nov 20 at 12:55











          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: "69"
          };
          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: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3005308%2fshowing-that-the-energy-of-the-wave-equation-in-mathbb-rd-is-constant%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          1
          down vote













          This is a typical energy method approach to use this to show the wave equation have but one solution. Rewrite your integral as



          $$E(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}^2 + |nabla u|^2 dx$$



          Then



          $$E'(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} 2u_{t}u_{tt} + 2(nabla u cdot nabla u_t) dx$$



          Here is the step where IBP is performed. Since you're curious, in higher dimension, the formula is



          $$int_U u_{x_{i}}v dx = -int_U uv_{x_{i}}dx + int_{partial U}uvnu^{i} dS$$



          for $i = 1,2,...n$ and $nu^i$ is the $ith$ component of the outward pointing unit normal vector of $U$, an open set bounded in $mathbb{R}^n$. Applying it here we get



          $$int_{mathbb{R}^d}nabla u cdot nabla u_t ,dx = -int_{mathbb{R}^d}u_t Delta u , dx$$



          since the boundary of $Bbb{R}^n$ is empty. Hence



          $$E'(t) = 2int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}(u_{tt} - Delta u) dx = 0$$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
            – math.h
            Nov 20 at 11:42










          • Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
            – DaveNine
            Nov 20 at 12:55















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          This is a typical energy method approach to use this to show the wave equation have but one solution. Rewrite your integral as



          $$E(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}^2 + |nabla u|^2 dx$$



          Then



          $$E'(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} 2u_{t}u_{tt} + 2(nabla u cdot nabla u_t) dx$$



          Here is the step where IBP is performed. Since you're curious, in higher dimension, the formula is



          $$int_U u_{x_{i}}v dx = -int_U uv_{x_{i}}dx + int_{partial U}uvnu^{i} dS$$



          for $i = 1,2,...n$ and $nu^i$ is the $ith$ component of the outward pointing unit normal vector of $U$, an open set bounded in $mathbb{R}^n$. Applying it here we get



          $$int_{mathbb{R}^d}nabla u cdot nabla u_t ,dx = -int_{mathbb{R}^d}u_t Delta u , dx$$



          since the boundary of $Bbb{R}^n$ is empty. Hence



          $$E'(t) = 2int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}(u_{tt} - Delta u) dx = 0$$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
            – math.h
            Nov 20 at 11:42










          • Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
            – DaveNine
            Nov 20 at 12:55













          up vote
          1
          down vote










          up vote
          1
          down vote









          This is a typical energy method approach to use this to show the wave equation have but one solution. Rewrite your integral as



          $$E(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}^2 + |nabla u|^2 dx$$



          Then



          $$E'(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} 2u_{t}u_{tt} + 2(nabla u cdot nabla u_t) dx$$



          Here is the step where IBP is performed. Since you're curious, in higher dimension, the formula is



          $$int_U u_{x_{i}}v dx = -int_U uv_{x_{i}}dx + int_{partial U}uvnu^{i} dS$$



          for $i = 1,2,...n$ and $nu^i$ is the $ith$ component of the outward pointing unit normal vector of $U$, an open set bounded in $mathbb{R}^n$. Applying it here we get



          $$int_{mathbb{R}^d}nabla u cdot nabla u_t ,dx = -int_{mathbb{R}^d}u_t Delta u , dx$$



          since the boundary of $Bbb{R}^n$ is empty. Hence



          $$E'(t) = 2int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}(u_{tt} - Delta u) dx = 0$$






          share|cite|improve this answer














          This is a typical energy method approach to use this to show the wave equation have but one solution. Rewrite your integral as



          $$E(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}^2 + |nabla u|^2 dx$$



          Then



          $$E'(t) = int_{mathbb{R}^d} 2u_{t}u_{tt} + 2(nabla u cdot nabla u_t) dx$$



          Here is the step where IBP is performed. Since you're curious, in higher dimension, the formula is



          $$int_U u_{x_{i}}v dx = -int_U uv_{x_{i}}dx + int_{partial U}uvnu^{i} dS$$



          for $i = 1,2,...n$ and $nu^i$ is the $ith$ component of the outward pointing unit normal vector of $U$, an open set bounded in $mathbb{R}^n$. Applying it here we get



          $$int_{mathbb{R}^d}nabla u cdot nabla u_t ,dx = -int_{mathbb{R}^d}u_t Delta u , dx$$



          since the boundary of $Bbb{R}^n$ is empty. Hence



          $$E'(t) = 2int_{mathbb{R}^d} u_{t}(u_{tt} - Delta u) dx = 0$$







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Nov 20 at 13:06

























          answered Nov 20 at 10:26









          DaveNine

          1,241914




          1,241914












          • Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
            – math.h
            Nov 20 at 11:42










          • Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
            – DaveNine
            Nov 20 at 12:55


















          • Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
            – math.h
            Nov 20 at 11:42










          • Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
            – DaveNine
            Nov 20 at 12:55
















          Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
          – math.h
          Nov 20 at 11:42




          Why the last integral equals 0? $u$ being solution of the wave equation only implies that $u_{tt}= Delta u$
          – math.h
          Nov 20 at 11:42












          Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
          – DaveNine
          Nov 20 at 12:55




          Ah, I made an error, I will edit.
          – DaveNine
          Nov 20 at 12:55


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3005308%2fshowing-that-the-energy-of-the-wave-equation-in-mathbb-rd-is-constant%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

          Quarter-circle Tiles

          build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

          Mont Emei