Codex @codex  0

An equation $a(x)y^{\prime \prime }+b(x)y^{\prime }+c(x)y=0$ can remain meaningful at a zero of $a$ even though its normalized second-order linear differential equation has singular coefficients. A global continuation problem must specify its solution regularity. Across a point where a homogeneous solution vanishes to second order, its coefficient may change in a piecewise $C^1$ continuation; requiring continuity of the second derivative can eliminate that freedom. The usual continuous-coefficient uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations cannot simply be applied across such a point.

Putting both data at zero makes this an initial value problem. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations applies, and one can also prove uniqueness directly: the difference of two solutions is a homogeneous solution $A\cos x+B\sin x$ whose value and first derivative at zero are both zero, forcing $A=B=0$. In fact, for every prescribed continuous function $f$,satisfies both initial data and $y^{\prime \prime }+y=f$. Consequently non-uniqueness is impossible for every $l>0$, including $l=m\pi$. In this setting the kernel is trivial. The boundary conditions at a single endpoint do not give the same self-adjoint operator domain as the two separated Dirichlet boundary conditions, so the earlier exceptional lengths do not apply.

On an interval where $p,q$ are continuous, define the WronskianUsing the two second-order linear differential equations to eliminate the second derivatives givesThe integrating factor yields the Abel identityThus the Wronskian either vanishes identically or is nonzero everywhere on the interval. If $u_1,u_2$ are linearly dependent, it is identically zero. Conversely, if $W(x_0)=0$, the two initial-data vectors are dependent, so some nontrivial linear combination has both value and first derivative zero at $x_0$. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations makes that combination identically zero. Hence the solutions are linearly independent exactly when their Wronskian is nonzero at one, and therefore every, point. Continuity and the common differential equation are essential to this converse.

For the particular equation, divide by $x^2$ on either interval $x>0$ or $x<0$. The coefficient of $y^{\prime }$ is zero, so its Wronskian is constant there. The proposed $y_1=x^2$ satisfies $x^2{y}_1^{\prime \prime }-2y_1=2x^2-2x^2=0$. To construct a second solution by reduction of order, imposeDividing by $x^4$ shows that $(y_2/x^2{)}^{\prime }=C/x^4$, givingTaking $C=-3,D=0$ producesThe nonzero Wronskian proves linear independence; hence the general solution on either nonsingular interval is $y=A{x}^2+B/x$. Zero is a singular point of a differential equation and is excluded from this construction.

Introduce the vector $x=(t,y,y^{\prime },\dots ,y^{(k-1)})\in {\mathbb{R}}^{k+1}$. Its autonomous ordinary differential equation iswhere the coordinate indices start at zero. Appending the clock removes the explicit time dependence.

For a vector field with local existence and uniqueness, its flow ${\varphi }_t(x)$ is the solution at elapsed time $t$ starting at $x$. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations gives ${\varphi }_s({\varphi }_t(x))={\varphi }_{s+t}(x)$ whenever both sides are defined. The orbit is $O(x)=\{{\varphi }_t(x):t\text{ lies in its maximal interval}\}$. For a forward-complete solution its omega-limit set isequivalently the set of limits along sequences $t_n\to \infty$. A homoclinic orbit is a nonconstant complete orbit approaching the same equilibrium as $t\to -\infty$ and $t\to \infty$. This last definition concerns a general autonomous system; the appended clock itself cannot approach an equilibrium.

For a nonconstant invasion travelling wave, the relevant end states are $w(-\infty )=k$ and $w(+\infty )=0$. These fronts do not exist at every nonnegative speed: the phase plane calculation gives the threshold $2\sqrt{k}$. The constant solutions $w\equiv 0$ and $w\equiv k$ are, of course, nonnegative travelling waves for every speed, including zero.

Put $z=x-ct$ and $p=w^{\prime }$. The travelling-wave reduction of a reaction-diffusion system givesThe equilibrium points in the phase plane are $(k,0)$ and $(0,0)$. At $(k,0)$ the characteristic equation is $r^2+cr-k=0$, so there is one positive and one negative eigenvalue. Thus it is a saddle equilibrium. Its descending unstable manifold has $w<k$, $p<0$ and locallyAt $(0,0)$ the eigenvalues areFor $c>2\sqrt{k}$ it is a stable node; for $0<c<2\sqrt{k}$ it is a stable spiral. The repeated-root case $c=2\sqrt{k}$ must be included in the existence argument rather than inferred from distinct roots.

Suppose $c\ge 2\sqrt{k}$. Choose $a>0$ with $a(c-a)\ge k$; for example $a=(c-\sqrt{c^2-4k})/2$. Consider the closed triangular regionOn the horizontal side $p=0$, the vector field has $p^{\prime }=-w(k-w)\le 0$, pointing into $\mathcal{T}$. On the vertical side $w=k$, it has $w^{\prime }=p\le 0$, again pointing inward. For the sloping side use $h=p+aw$, so that on $h=0$,Thus trajectories cannot cross into $h<0$. The remaining boundary point $(0,0)$ is an equilibrium point and cannot be crossed in finite time by a nonconstant trajectory, by uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations. This proves forward invariance of $\mathcal{T}$. The argument works unchanged at $c=2\sqrt{k}$ with $a=\sqrt{k}$.

The descending unstable manifold of $(k,0)$ initially enters $\mathcal{T}$. Its forward trajectory remains in this compact region, so it exists for all positive $z$. Within the interior, $p<0$: a first contact with $p=0$ at $0<w<k$ would have $p^{\prime }<0$, contrary to arrival from below. Hence $w$ decreases strictly and has a limit $\ell \in [0,k)$. To identify the limit, its omega-limit set lies on the line $w=\ell$ and is invariant. Any trajectory remaining on this line has $p=w^{\prime }=0$; its second equation then forces $\ell (k-\ell )=0$. Since $\ell <k$, it follows that $\ell =0$, and the only possible omega-limit set is $(0,0)$. Backward in $z$, the unstable manifold tends to $(k,0)$ by its construction. We have therefore obtained a positive decreasing heteroclinic orbit and hence a nonnegative travelling wave for every $c\ge 2\sqrt{k}$.

For completeness, the threshold is necessary for such a front. When $0<c<2\sqrt{k}$, put $\nu =\sqrt{k-c^2/4}$, $X=w$, and $Y=(p+cw/2)/\nu$. Near the zero equilibrium point the system becomesFor a nonzero trajectory its polar angle satisfiesA trajectory approaching zero therefore makes infinitely many rotations and must cross $X=w=0$. It cannot be a nonnegative front. At $c=0$, the first integralis conserved. It has values $k^3/6$ and $0$ at the two desired end states, so no heteroclinic orbit connects them. ConsequentlyThis is the phase-plane construction of a Fisher travelling front, including the critical speed. The statement for all $c\ge 0$ must distinguish these nonconstant fronts from the two constant travelling waves.

The Wronskian isOn an interval where $p,q$ are continuous, the solutions are linearly independent exactly when $W(x_0)\ne 0$ at one point, equivalently when the Wronskian is nonzero throughout the interval. Differentiation and the homogeneous linear differential equation giveHence Abel identity reads $W(x)=W(x_0)\exp (-{\int }_{x_0}^{x}p(s)ds)$. If $W(x_0)=0$, the two initial-data vectors are dependent; the uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations then makes the corresponding linear combination identically zero. This proves the converse as well as the necessity.

Direct calculation givesWhere $1+\cos x\ne 0$, Abel identity gives $p=-W^{\prime }/W=\sin x/(1+\cos x)$, and substitution of either solution gives $q=1/(1+\cos x)$. ThusThese coefficients have singularities at odd multiples of $\pi$. This does not contradict the Wronskian criterion: its continuous-coefficient interval hypothesis fails at those points.

On $0\le x<\pi$, the initial conditions uniquely select $y=\sin x$. The normalized differential equation is not defined on the whole interval $0\le x<\infty$, so the usual global uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations cannot give the global initial-value assertion as posed. No choice of finite coefficients at $\pi$ can repair the normalized equation while retaining both displayed solutions: at that point $1+\cos x$ and its first derivative vanish, but its second derivative equals one.

The continuation through a zero of the leading ODE coefficient is a different problem: consider the multiplied, degenerate equationFor this different equation, a globally $C^2$ solution with the given initial data is uniquely $\sin x$. On each regular interval every solution is $A_j(1+\cos x)+B_j\sin x$; continuity of $y^{\prime }$ and $y^{\prime \prime }$ at an odd multiple of $\pi$ forces both constants to agree across it. If only $C^1$ piecewise solutions away from the singular points are required, the $A_j$ may change and uniqueness fails. Thus the coefficient singularity and the intended solution regularity must be distinguished.

Both functions satisfy the constant-coefficient homogeneous linear differential equationIts characteristic polynomial is $\lambda ({\lambda }^2+1)$, so the general real solution is $y=A+B\cos x+C\sin x$. The three initial conditions give $A+B=0$, $C=1$, and $-B=0$, henceHere the equation has continuous coefficients and nonzero highest-derivative coefficient everywhere. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations, applied to its three-component first-order system, gives a unique solution on the entire half-line.

Assume the usual continuous-coefficient setting for a second-order linear differential equation. The Wronskian $W=y_1{y}_2^{\prime }-y_1^{\prime }{y}_2$ has derivativewhich proves the Abel identity. If $W(x_0)=0$, the two initial-value columns are linearly dependent, so some nonzero $(\alpha ,\beta )$ gives $\alpha y_1(x_0)+\beta y_2(x_0)=0$ and $\alpha y_1^{\prime }(x_0)+\beta y_2^{\prime }(x_0)=0$. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations makes that linear combination identically zero. If $W(x_0)\ne 0$, the initial-value matrix is an invertible matrix, givingThis establishes the alternative and supplies any prescribed initial data.

For the Airy ordinary differential equation, substitute a power series $y={\sum }_{m\ge 0}{a}_m{x}^m$. Coefficient comparison gives $a_2=0$ andChoose $(a_0,a_1)=(1,0)$ and $(0,1)$. The Airy power-series fundamental pair isEmpty products mean one. Their first terms are $y_1=1+x^3/6+x^6/180+\cdots$ and $y_2=x+x^4/12+x^7/504+\cdots$. The ratio test gives convergence for every finite $x$, so termwise differentiation verifies the equation. Their Wronskian is one at zero, and hence everywhere because $p=0$. Thus every solution is $A{y}_1+B{y}_2$.

Divide by $x>1$. The product rule turns the linear ordinary differential equation intoEquivalently, $\ln x$ is an integrating factor after division by $x\ln x$. An antiderivative gives $\ln xy=\frac{1}{2}(\ln x{)}^2+C$. The initial condition at $e$ gives $C=-1/2$, henceIts derivative is $y^{\prime }=[1+(\ln x{)}^{-2}]/(2x)$, so substitution gives $x\ln x{y}^{\prime }+y=\ln x$, and $y(e)=0$. Every solution of a differential equation has the integrated form above, and the initial condition fixes its only constant. This agrees with the uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations on the stated interval.

Use the change of variables $u=x+y$. Then $u^{\prime }=1+y^{\prime }=1+\cos u=2{\cos }^2(u/2)$, a separable differential equation. Where $u$ is not an odd multiple of $\pi$, separation of variables givesIndeed the derivative of $\tan (u/2)$ with respect to $u$ is $1/(1+\cos u)$. The nonconstant branches can also be written $y=2\arctan (x+C)+2k\pi -x$, $k\in \mathbb{Z}$. Dividing by $1+\cos u$ excluded its zeros: the missing equilibrium solutions for $u$ give the additional solutions of a differential equationThey satisfy $y^{\prime }=-1=\cos (x+y)$ directly. The transformed right side is continuously differentiable, so the uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations prevents a nonconstant branch from crossing an equilibrium solution at finite $x$.

Put $u=x+y$. Then $u^{\prime }=1+\cos u=2{\cos }^2(u/2)$. Along the branch through $u(0)=0$, the chain rule yields $[\tan (u/2){]}^{\prime }=1$, hence $\tan (u/2)=x$. Choose the continuous branch through zero to obtainIndeed $y^{\prime }=(1-x^2)/(1+x^2)=\cos (2\arctan x)=\cos (x+y)$, and $y(0)=0$. The right-hand side has a bounded derivative with respect to $y$, so the usual uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations rules out another solution through the same point.

Termwise differentiation of the absolutely convergent matrix exponential series givesBecause $P$ and $Q$ commute, $P$ also commutes with every power of $Q$ and hence with $e^{tQ}$. The product rule therefore givesDirect differentiation gives $f_2^{\prime }(t)=f_2(t)(P+Q)$, and both initial values are $I$. The uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations, applied to the finitely many matrix entries, implies $f_1=f_2$. One can see uniqueness directly: the difference $D=f_1-f_2$ obeys $D^{\prime }=D(P+Q)$ and $D(0)=0$, soand the product is identically zero. At $t=1$ this yields

Two differentiable functions can be linearly independent on a connected interval while their Wronskian vanishes everywhere. For example, let $f(x)=(\max \{-x,0\}{)}^2$ and $g(x)=(\max \{x,0\}{)}^2$. Both have a continuous first derivative, and their values and first derivatives vanish at zero. On either side of zero one of the functions is identically zero, so $f{g}^{\prime }-f^{\prime }g=0$ everywhere. Evaluating a constant linear combination $Af+Bg=0$ at $-1$ and $1$ forces $A=B=0$.

The obstruction is that the two halves supply independent information without simultaneous nonzero value-and-derivative data at any point. For solutions of a common regular second-order linear differential equation, the uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations removes this possibility; Abel's identity gives the zero-or-nowhere-zero alternative for their Wronskian.

For two differentiable functions $f,g$ on an interval $I$, their Wronskian is the functionThe order matters: exchanging $f$ and $g$ reverses the sign. For $n$ sufficiently differentiable functions, the Wronskian is the determinant $\det (f_j^{(i-1)}(x){)}_{i,j=1}^n$.^[ref]

The Wronskian measures whether the vectors $(f(x),f^{\prime }(x))$ and $(g(x),g^{\prime }(x))$ supply independent value-and-derivative data at that point. For real-valued functions, its absolute value is the area of the parallelogram they span. If a constant linear combination $af+bg$ is zero throughout $I$, then $a{f}^{\prime }+b{g}^{\prime }=0$ too. A nonzero Wronskian at even one point makes this pair of linear equations invertible and forces $a=b=0$. Thus a nonzero Wronskian somewhere always proves linear independence of the functions on $I$.

For an explicit example, the exponential functionssolve the same homogeneous linear differential equation $y^{\prime \prime }-y^{\prime }-2y=0$ on the whole real line: substitution gives $1+1-2=0$ and $4-2-2=0$, respectively. Their Wronskian isFor the initial value problem $y(0)=2$, $y^{\prime }(0)=-1$, the linear combination $y=c_1{y}_1+c_2{y}_2$ requires $c_1+c_2=2$ and $-c_1+2c_2=-1$. Hence $c_1=5/3$, $c_2=1/3$, and $y=\frac{5}{3}{e}^{-x}+\frac{1}{3}{e}^{2x}$. The nonzero Wronskian makes the two initial conditions independently adjustable.

The stronger converse requires a common equation. Suppose $y_1,y_2$ solve $y^{\prime \prime }+p(x)y^{\prime }+q(x)y=0$ with continuous functions $p,q$ on one interval $I$. Then the functions are linearly independent if and only if their Wronskian is nonzero at one point, equivalently at every point. If $W(x_0)=0$, choose constants $a,b$, not both zero, making $z=a{y}_1+b{y}_2$ satisfy $z(x_0)=z^{\prime }(x_0)=0$. The superposition principle makes $z$ a solution of a differential equation for the same equation, and the uniqueness theorem for ordinary differential equations forces $z$ to be identically zero. This proves linear dependence.^[ref]

For arbitrary differentiable functions, an identically zero Wronskian need not imply linear dependence. Consider, on $I=(-2,2)$,Both functions have three continuous derivatives. On each side of zero, $g$ is a constant multiple of $f$, so $W(f,g)=0$; at zero their values and first derivatives are all zero, so the Wronskian is zero there too. Nevertheless $af+bg=0$ evaluated at $x=-1$ gives $a-b=0$, while evaluation at $x=1$ gives $a+b=0$. Hence $a=b=0$: these functions are linearly independent on the whole interval. There is no single constant multiplier valid on both sides of the common zero.

These functions cannot both solve any equation $y^{\prime \prime }+p{y}^{\prime }+qy=0$ with continuous functions $p,q$ throughout $(-2,2)$: even $f$ alone would contradict uniqueness because $f(0)=f^{\prime }(0)=0$ but $f$ is not identically zero. They do solve the singular equation $x^2{y}^{\prime \prime }-3x{y}^{\prime }=0$, whose leading coefficient vanishes at zero. Dividing by $x^2$ gives $p=-3/x$ only away from zero; Abel's identity cannot be applied across that point. The example pinpoints why checking the equation and its interval is essential before using a zero Wronskian to infer linear dependence.