Talk:Sturm-Liouville theory: Difference between revisions
imported>Paul Wormer (→Error) |
imported>Paul Wormer (→Error) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
== Error == | == Error == | ||
It seems to me that the article contains an error. Consider the | It seems to me that the article contains an error. Consider the definition: | ||
: <math>L u = {1 \over w(x)} \left(-{d\over dx}\left[p(x){du\over dx}\right]+q(x)u \right)</math> | : <math>L u = {1 \over w(x)} \left(-{d\over dx}\left[p(x){du\over dx}\right]+q(x)u \right)</math> | ||
Contrary to what is implied in the article, the operator ''L'' is ''not'' self-adjoint, unless 1/''w''(''x'') commutes with the operator to its right. This is in general not the case. The proper way to transform is | Contrary to what is implied in the article, the operator ''L'' thus defined is ''not'' self-adjoint, unless 1/''w''(''x'') commutes with the operator to its right. This is in general not the case. The proper way to transform is (''L'' in the next equation is ''w''(''x'') times ''L'' in the previous equation): | ||
:<math> | :<math> | ||
L u = | L u = \lambda\, w\;u\; \Longrightarrow\; w^{-1/2} L w^{-1/2} w^{1/2} u = \lambda\, w^{1/2} u \; \Longrightarrow\; | ||
\tilde{L}\,\tilde{u} = \tilde{u} | \tilde{L}\,\tilde{u} = \lambda\,\tilde{u} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
with | with |
Revision as of 02:15, 14 October 2009
Numbered equations
Hi Daniel,
I had to transform the templates provided in the WP article for numbered equations into plain old wikimarkup. I attempted to bring these templates over from WP, but they called many other templates and when I got them all over, the combined result didn't work. I decided to use a simple bit of html that defined a span with right justification and also defined an anchor. To reference the equation you then only need to insert a mediawiki markup referencing the anchor. It wouldn't be hard to turn this all into two templates if you think that would be useful. Dan Nessett 19:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Redacted comment. I see it now.
Error
It seems to me that the article contains an error. Consider the definition:
Contrary to what is implied in the article, the operator L thus defined is not self-adjoint, unless 1/w(x) commutes with the operator to its right. This is in general not the case. The proper way to transform is (L in the next equation is w(x) times L in the previous equation):
with
Since w(x) is positive-definite w(x)−½ is well-defined and real. The operator is self-adjoint.
--Paul Wormer 08:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)