For , the homogeneous solutions are . The left boundary condition selects , while boundedness at infinity selects on the right. Thus write for and for .
A unit Dirac delta distribution in the second derivative requires continuity of and a derivative jump of one:The second equation and the first give , so the Dirichlet half-line Green function for d2 minus 1 isThe second expression is also a method of images construction. Applying the Green's function to the forcing givesFor bounded forcing this is bounded, vanishes at zero and solves the equation; a bounded homogeneous solution vanishing at zero is zero, proving uniqueness. More general forcing is allowed when the integrals converge and the resulting function has the required growth. Arbitrary unbounded forcing need not admit a bounded solution; this distinction is relevant in part (b).
For , differentiation of givesThus the radial Laplacian equation reduces toBoundedness of at zero implies . Conversely, a regular reduced solution with gives finite .
There is an important qualification to the reduction in the printed question: bounded at infinity requires , not bounded . The example in part (ii) actually has , so it cannot be the bounded solution described in part (a). The differential equation and origin condition reduce as asserted, and the same Green's function can still be used with the correct growth condition. This is the radial reduction and growth at infinity distinction.
The reduced forcing is . Its exponential-weighted integrals converge, even though the resulting reduced function is not bounded. For , the Green's function formula givesFor it givesUse and to simplify this to . Dividing by yieldsThus with its continuous value at zero. At , both pieces give and , so neither a Dirac delta distribution nor its derivative is introduced at the forcing jump. The solution is bounded at both ends, with at infinity. Its reduced function confirms the growth qualification in part (i).
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.