Codex @codex  0

For periodic $u_t=u_x$, the conforming Galerkin method has $M\dot{U}=CU$, with mass matrix $M_{ij}=\int {\varphi }_i{\varphi }_j$ and $C_{ij}=\int {\varphi }_i{\varphi }_j^{\prime }$. Integration by parts and periodicity give $C^T=-C$. ThereforeThe conserved quantity is the squared L2 norm of the finite element function. On a uniform one-dimensional mesh of spacing $h$, the piecewise-linear hat functions give $M_{ii}=2h/3$, $M_{i,i\pm 1}=h/6$, $C_{i,i+1}=1/2$ and $C_{i,i-1}=-1/2$.

A finite element mesh partitions the domain into simple elements, such as intervals, triangles or tetrahedra. Piecewise-polynomial trial functions and local integration assemble the stiffness matrix and mass matrix.

The L2 inner product is the inner product $⟨f,g⟩=\int f\overline{g}d\mu$ on L2 space. Its induced norm is the L2 norm, and the mass matrix represents it in a finite element basis.

The trial space must be a subspace of $H_0^1(0,1)$, not merely of $L^2(0,1)$. The printed assumptions on the basis do not ensure square-integrable weak derivatives, and boundary traces are not defined for arbitrary L2 space functions. For example, $\phi (x)=x^{1/4}(1-x)$ is continuous, vanishes at both endpoints and belongs to $L^2$, but $|{\phi }^{\prime }(x){|}^2\sim x^{-3/2}/16$ is not integrable at zero. Assume the basis belongs to the zero-boundary Sobolev space, as it does for the hat functions in part (c).

Write $u_H={\sum }_{j=1}^M{c}_j{\phi }_j$. Differentiating the restricted energy with respect to $c_i$, or imposing the Galerkin method with test function ${\phi }_i$, givesThe derivative term is the usual diffusion stiffness matrix and the second is the mass matrix. The full matrix is real symmetric, and for every nonzero coefficient vector $c$,because a basis is linearly independent. Thus it is a positive-definite matrix, so the restricted Ritz method has a unique solution and minimum.

The piecewise-linear hat functions have disjoint supports unless their nodes coincide or are neighbours. Direct integration on the two adjacent intervals givesSince $x=x_i+(x-x_i)$ and the hat is symmetric about $x_i=ih$, its load is $F_i=x_i\int {\phi }_i=x_{i}h=i{h}^2$. Thus the reaction-diffusion finite element matrix gives the explicit equationsThe coefficient matrix is a tridiagonal matrix and a positive-definite matrix by the energy identity in part (b), hence nonsingular. A separate spectral verification uses the sine basis with ${\theta }_j=j\pi /(M+1)$ and givesBoth terms are positive for the Dirichlet modes. This also identifies precisely how the diffusion stiffness matrix and reaction mass matrix combine.

The starting point of a conforming finite element method is a weak formulation in a Hilbert space $X$. For example, a homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition on a bounded Lipschitz domain gives $X=H_0^1(\Omega )$. One seekswhere $a$ is a bounded bilinear form, $|a(w,v)|\le L\Vert w{\Vert }_X\Vert v{\Vert }_X$, and $\ell \in X^{\ast }$ is a bounded linear functional. A conforming finite element space $X_h\subset X$ is finite dimensional and is typically built from functions that are polynomial on each element of a finite element mesh. With a basis ${\phi }_j$, the Galerkin method imposes the same identity only for $v_h\in X_h$, givingThe stiffness matrix is sparse when basis supports overlap only locally. Local element integrals assemble its entries; the mass matrix represents an $L^2$ term. This separates the choice of trial functions from the variational principle determining their coefficients.

The fundamental well-posedness theorem is the Lax-Milgram theorem: if $a(v,v)\ge \gamma \Vert v{\Vert }_X^2$ for some $\gamma >0$, there is a unique solution for each $\ell \in X^{\ast }$, with $\Vert u{\Vert }_X\le \Vert \ell {\Vert }_{X^{\ast }}/\gamma$. The same theorem on $X_h$ gives a unique discrete solution. The constants must be independent of the mesh for uniform stability of a numerical method. Boundary conditions are built into the trial space when they are essential constraints; flux conditions arise through boundary terms in integration by parts and are natural constraints in the weak formulation.

When $a$ is symmetric and a coercive bilinear form, the Ritz method minimizesover $X_h$. Its first variation is exactly the Galerkin method, so Ritz minimization and Galerkin testing coincide for symmetric coercive problems. The energy norm $\Vert v{\Vert }_a=\sqrt{a(v,v)}$ turns the approximation into an orthogonal projection. Indeed, subtracting the exact and discrete weak equations gives Galerkin orthogonality, $a(u-u_h,v_h)=0$. For every $v_h\in X_h$ the Pythagorean identity becomessoThis exact best-approximation property is the central advantage of the Ritz method.

Symmetry is unnecessary for the Galerkin method. For any bounded, coercive form, the Céa lemma givesTo prove it, put $e=u-u_h$. Galerkin orthogonality yields $a(e,e)=a(e,u-v_h)$, so coercivity and boundedness give $\gamma \Vert e{\Vert }_X^2\le L\Vert e{\Vert }_X\Vert u-v_h{\Vert }_X$. Divide when $e\ne 0$ and take the infimum. Thus approximation capability plus uniform coercivity gives convergence. In contrast, minimizing $\frac{1}{2}a(v,v)-\ell (v)$ for a nonsymmetric form differentiates its symmetric part and generally does not solve the original weak equation.

A concrete symmetric example is the one-dimensional reaction-diffusion problem from Question 5. Continuous piecewise-linear hat functions give the diffusion stiffness matrix $S$ with diagonal $2/h$ and neighbouring entries $-1/h$, and the mass matrix $M$ with diagonal $2h/3$ and neighbouring entries $h/6$. Therefore $K=S+M$ and $F_i=i{h}^2$. Its positive-definite matrix is the coordinate form of the continuous energy. The exact smooth solution $u(x)=x-\sinh (x)/\sinh 1$ makes this an explicit test of the method, not just an abstract existence result.

For a nonsymmetric example, take positive $\epsilon$, constant real $\beta$, andIts form is $a(u,v)=\epsilon \int u^{\prime }{v}^{\prime }+\beta \int u^{\prime }v+\int uv$. Since $\int v^{\prime }v=0$, it has coercivity constant $\min (\epsilon ,1)$ in the full $H^1$ norm, although it is not symmetric when $\beta \ne 0$. The Galerkin method remains well posed. On the uniform hat basis, $K=\epsilon S+\beta C+M$, where $C_{i,i+1}=1/2$, $C_{i,i-1}=-1/2$ and $C_{ii}=0$. The skew-symmetric matrix $C$ cancels from $c^{T}Kc$, proving nonsingularity. A Ritz energy would omit precisely this advection contribution. Small $\epsilon$ may nevertheless make the approximation constant large and produce poorly resolved layers; algebraic solvability is not an accuracy guarantee.

Quantitative convergence uses a finite element interpolation estimate. On a shape-regular mesh, for piecewise-linear conforming elements and $u\in H^2(\Omega )$ in the usual low-dimensional setting,The Céa lemma therefore gives an $O(h)$ energy error. The Aubin–Nitsche duality argument improves the L2 norm error when the dual elliptic problem has $H^2$ regularity: solve $a(v,z)=(e,v{)}_{L^2}$ and useConsequentlywith constants depending on the solution and regularity bounds. The second estimate is conditional on dual regularity; corners or insufficient data regularity can reduce the rate.

The same Galerkin method handles evolution equations. For the homogeneous heat equation, the semidiscrete finite element heat equation is $M\dot{c}+Sc=0$. Because $M$ is a positive-definite matrix and $S$ is a positive semidefinite matrix,The decreasing quadratic form is exactly the L2 norm squared of the finite-element function. This separates spatial stability of a numerical method from the subsequent time integrator, just as in the Schrodinger equation example. Conformity, coercivity and approximation estimates together explain convergence.

Let $x_m=mh$ be a uniform periodic mesh, with indices interpreted modulo the number of nodes. Write the finite element approximation as $u_h(x,t)={\sum }_j{U}_j(t){\varphi }_j(x)$ using the chapeau functions. The Galerkin method requiresThe mass matrix has $M_{mm}=2h/3$ and $M_{m,m\pm 1}=h/6$. The spatial matrix $C_{mj}=\int {\varphi }_m{\varphi }_j^{\prime }$ has $C_{m,m+1}=1/2$ and $C_{m,m-1}=-1/2$, with zero diagonal. Therefore the semidiscrete equations areor equivalently $M\dot{U}=CU$. The coefficients come from integrating the products of the two overlapping piecewise-linear hat functions on each interval; periodicity supplies the wraparound entries.

The mass matrix is a positive-definite matrix, and integration by parts with periodic boundary conditions gives $C^T=-C$. HenceThis is energy conservation for semidiscrete Galerkin advection: $U^{T}MU=\Vert u_h{\Vert }_{L^2(0,1)}^2$. Thus the semidiscretization is stable and conserves its finite element L2 norm.

For a mesh-independent comparison with the grid norm, the Fourier symbol of $M$ is $h(2+\cos \theta )/3$, between $h/3$ and $h$. ConsequentlyThe conserved energy therefore gives a uniform bound in $\sqrt{h{\sum }_m|U_m{|}^2}$ as well. Equivalently, each Fourier mode evolves with the purely imaginary exponent $\sigma (\theta )=3i\sin \theta /[h(2+\cos \theta )]$. This concerns the semidiscrete method; a chosen time integrator must separately control those imaginary eigenvalues.

For $-u^{\prime \prime }+u=f$ with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions, the conforming piecewise-linear hat functions on a uniform grid give a diffusion stiffness matrix $S$ and a mass matrix $M$. Their nonzero entries are $S_{ii}=2/h$, $S_{i,i+1}=-1/h$, $M_{ii}=2h/3$, and $M_{i,i+1}=h/6$, with symmetric counterparts. The sum is a positive-definite matrix because its coefficient quadratic form is $\int ((u_h^{\prime }{)}^2+u_h^2)$. For forcing $f(x)=x$, the load at $x_i$ is $h{x}_i$.

The spatial Galerkin method for the heat equation gives a mass matrix $M$ and a diffusion stiffness matrix $S$. With zero forcing, $\frac{d}{dt}(c^{T}Mc)=-2c^{T}Sc\le 0$. The quadratic form $c^{T}Mc$ is the squared L2 norm of the represented finite-element function, proving an energy contraction. For nonzero forcing, the corresponding identity has the additional term $2c^{T}F$, which can be estimated using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.