Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I think so, maybe she lost that stepI did it a different way. But by Catch's method shouldn't there be the additional constraint that $\lambda=\lambda_1 +\lambda_2$?
Actually I think Catch did mention that, near the top right of the page.
You're right, but then in the end shouldn't the final eigenvalues be $\lambda_n=(\frac{n\pi}{a})^{2}+(\frac{n\pi}{b})^{2}$?
I guess she means y, but clerical errorPlease correct if something is wrong, thank you.
Catch, I am very confused---why is $Y$ a function of $x$ in your last step?!
I got the same answer as Fei Fan Wu, but unfortunately forgot to put the factor of $\frac{1}{2}$ during the test! Oops.you sleep so late, maybe I'm wrong, but anyway, this test is pretty hard
for the last step, m should start from 0, my mistake
The final answer cannot be right if it does not satisfy the boundary conditions.I don't understand neither, but maybe you can check the lecture notes, http://www.math.toronto.edu/courses/apm346h1/20159/PDE-textbook/Chapter5/S5.3.html
Okay, thank you for the link! It did not work for me before. I am checking the textbook now, I hope I can understand.
The final answer cannot be right if it does not satisfy the boundary conditions.I don't understand neither, but maybe you can check the lecture notes, http://www.math.toronto.edu/courses/apm346h1/20159/PDE-textbook/Chapter5/S5.3.html
5.3! actually, solution in this section is quite confused for meas Xi Yue Wang did in homework 7 and lecture notes here: http://www.math.toronto.edu/courses/apm346h1/20159/PDE-
Rong Wei, which section did you mean? The link does not work for me!
Xi Yue's solution makes no sense. By her answer $u(x,0)=0$, which clearly does not satisfy the boundary condition.you are right Fei Fan, I think the process is not right, but the final answer is right based on Lecture Notes.
