Codex @codex  0

Take a smooth variation $u_{\epsilon }=u+\epsilon \varphi$ with $\varphi =0$ on the boundary. Assume enough differentiability for the following operations, for example a smooth bounded open set, $u\in C^2$, and a twice continuously differentiable integrand. Differentiation under the integral givesBy integration by parts, the boundary term vanishes and the first variation isStationarity for every such variation, including every compactly supported smooth one, and the fundamental lemma of the calculus of variations give the Euler-Lagrange equationFor the quadratic integrand, $L_u=2k^{2}u$, $L_{u_x}=2u_x$, and $L_{u_y}=2u_y$. Thuswith the prescribed Dirichlet boundary condition. For real $k$, a stationary function is also the unique minimizer, if it exists: for any nonzero admissible $\varphi$, the linear term vanishes and $I[u+\varphi ]-I[u]={\int }_{\mathcal{D}}(|\nabla \varphi {|}^2+k^2{\varphi }^2)>0$. This last positivity uses the zero boundary values; it also holds at $k=0$.

In the curvature $-1$ normalization, the hyperbolic triangle area is its angle defect:Join one vertex of a convex geodesic polygon to its nonadjacent vertices. This gives $n-2$ hyperbolic triangles with disjoint interiors. Their angles at every polygon vertex sum to that vertex's interior angle. Adding the hyperbolic triangle areas therefore gives the hyperbolic polygon areaFor a regular hyperbolic polygon with prescribed area, place $n$ equally spaced vertices on a hyperbolic circle of radius $R>0$ and join consecutive vertices by geodesics. Rotations through $2\pi /n$ and reflections in radial lines show that this is a convex regular polygon. The triangle from its centre to a vertex and the midpoint of an adjacent side is right angled, with angles $\pi /n$, $\alpha (R)/2$, and $\pi /2$, and hypotenuse $R$. The angle form of the hyperbolic law of cosines givesConsequently $A(R)=(n-2)\pi -n\alpha (R)$ is continuous and strictly increasing. As $R\downarrow 0$, $\alpha (R)\to \pi -2\pi /n$, so $A(R)\to 0$; as $R\to \infty$, $\alpha (R)\to 0$, so $A(R)\to (n-2)\pi$. The intermediate value theorem proves existence for every permitted $A$. Indeed the required radius isThe argument also proves uniqueness of the radius in this construction; neither endpoint area is attained by a nondegenerate finite-radius polygon.

For complex differentiability at a point, the derivative must have the same value along real and imaginary increments. Along real increments it equals $u_x+i{v}_x$, while along imaginary increments it equals $(u_y+i{v}_y)/i=v_y-i{u}_y$. Equating real and imaginary parts gives the Cauchy-Riemann equationsFor the given real part,Integrating the Cauchy-Riemann equations gives a harmonic conjugateThis open set is open and connected; $F$ is holomorphic there with derivative $-z^{-2}$. The origin must be excluded because the real part is undefined there. On this connected open set, any other harmonic conjugate differs by a real constant: the Cauchy-Riemann equations make both partial derivatives of the difference zero.

Assume the intended initial fortune satisfies $n\ge 2$ and put $X_0=n$. Conditional on current fortune $i>1$, the next gift is uniform on $\{1,\dots ,i-1\}$ and independent of the previous choices. The remaining fortune is therefore uniform on that same set. At fortune $1$ the process stays there. Consequently the future conditional distribution depends only on the current fortune, proving the Markov property, and the transition matrix on $\{1,\dots ,n\}$ isThe uniform decreasing Markov chain has state $1$ as an absorbing state, and until absorption the fortune strictly decreases, so the hitting time is at most $n-1$.

Let $e_i$ be the expected number of additional transitions to hit $1$, taking $e_1=0$. First-step analysis givesIn particular $e_2=1$. For $i\ge 3$, multiplying this recurrence by $i-1$ and the recurrence for $i-1$ by $i-2$, then subtracting, gives $(i-1)e_i=(i-1)e_{i-1}+1$. Hence $e_i-e_{i-1}=1/(i-1)$ for every $i\ge 2$, and telescoping yieldsThe PDF defines $\tau$ using times $i\ge 1$. If $n=1$ were included, that definition would give $\tau =1$ although the displayed empty sum is zero; the initial instruction to choose an integer between $1$ and $n-1$ also requires $n\ge 2$. The result above uses that intended assumption. A hitting time allowing time zero would have expectation zero from state $1$, but that is a different definition.

Assume $f$ is sufficiently smooth, for example $C^3$ near the exact trajectory. Write $f,f^{\prime },f^{\prime \prime }$ at the current value, with $f^{\prime }$ a linear map and $f^{\prime \prime }$ a bilinear map when the ordinary differential equation is vector valued. Taylor expansion of the stages givesThe exact flow has Taylor expansionMatching the terms through $h^3$ in the Runge-Kutta method gives the sufficient third-order conditions for an explicit Runge-Kutta methodFor scalar $f$, replace $f^{\prime \prime }[f,f]$ by $f^{\prime \prime }{f}^2$ and $(f^{\prime }{)}^{2}f$ by $(f^{\prime }{)}^{2}f$ in the scalar sense. The resulting local error is $O(h^4)$; under a local Lipschitz continuity assumption and bounded derivatives on a finite time interval, the standard one-step error recurrence gives global error $O(h^3)$, hence third order.

On the linear test equation $y^{\prime }=\lambda y$, putting $z=h\lambda$ gives the stability functionThus $\boxed{|R(-5/2)|=47/48<1}$, so $-5/2$ lies inside the linear stability domain. The four order conditions are compatible, for example $a_1=1/2,a_2=-1,a_3=2$ and $(b_1,b_2,b_3)=(1/6,2/3,1/6)$.

In a source-free vacuum, Maxwell equations areTaking a curl of the last two equations and using $\nabla \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{A})=\nabla (\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A})-{\nabla }^2\mathbf{A}$ gives the electromagnetic wave equationsSubstitution of the complex plane wave amplitudes into Maxwell equations, then taking real parts, givesFor a nonzero propagating wave these imply the dispersion relation $\boxed{{\omega }^2=c^2|\mathbf{k}{|}^2}$. Conversely choose any nonzero transverse complex $\mathbf{e}$ and set $\mathbf{b}=\mathbf{k}\times \mathbf{e}/\omega$ to obtain such a wave. The static uniform-field sector at $\omega =|\mathbf{k}|=0$ is separate from propagation.

At a perfect conductor, the oscillatory boundary conditions are $\mathbf{n}\times \mathbf{E}=0$ and $\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{B}=0$. Surface charge and surface current allow nonzero normal electric and tangential magnetic fields. The magnetic condition here concerns the time-dependent wave field; a perfect conductor can retain a pre-existing static magnetic field.

Let $R=I-2\mathbf{n}{\mathbf{n}}^T$ be the orthogonal reflection across the boundary plane, so $\det R=-1$. The proposed reflected amplitudes are ${\mathbf{k}}^{\prime }=R\mathbf{k}$, ${\mathbf{e}}^{\prime }=-R\mathbf{e}$, and ${\mathbf{b}}^{\prime }=R\mathbf{b}$. For an orthogonal reflection, $(R\mathbf{a})\times (R\mathbf{d})=-R(\mathbf{a}\times \mathbf{d})$. HenceAlso $|{\mathbf{k}}^{\prime }|=|\mathbf{k}|$, so the reflected wave obeys the same dispersion relation. At $\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{x}=0$, the incident and reflected phases coincide because ${\mathbf{k}}^{\prime }-\mathbf{k}$ is parallel to $\mathbf{n}$. Their summed amplitudes satisfyThe first has zero tangential part and the second zero normal part, proving both boundary conditions. Finally ${\mathbf{k}}^{\prime }\cdot \mathbf{n}=-\mathbf{k}\cdot \mathbf{n}>0$, as required for reflection into the vacuum.