Results 1 to 8 of 8

Math Help - A Fredholm integral equation

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6

    A Fredholm integral equation

    solve fredholm integral equation
    integral from 0 to 1 of exp(x+t)u(t)dt =x
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    4
    Awards
    2
    I don't know whether your x is a function of t which you're trying to find, or whether x is a variable.

    Case 1: x is a variable independent of t. Then exp(x) comes out of the integral. If you let C = int_0^1 u(t) dt, then you must solve

    C exp(x) = x, or

    C = x exp(-x).

    Use Lambert's W function to solve.

    Case 2: x is a function of t. Then the LHS is a constant (because you've integrated out the only independent variable in the LHS), which implies that the RHS is a constant, and hence x is a constant. Again, pull exp(x) out of the integral, and solve as before.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6

    thank u toooooooo mutch BUT

    Quote Originally Posted by mathlovely View Post
    solve fredholm integral equation
    integral from 0 to 1 of exp(x+t)u(t)dt =x


    THIS FIE with first kind and homogenous equation
    Is there any solution for it
    please i want answer as soon
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    4
    Awards
    2
    I have an error in my definition for C. It should be



    Was there a problem with my solution? Your second post is enigmatic; it also is bordering on bumping, which is forbidden on MHF.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6

    your C is ok but ????

    I solve it like this
    C=integral from 0 to 1 of exp (t)*( C *exp(t)) after I subtitute u(t) by C*exp(t)
    but I DON'T know if
    there is any solution
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    4
    Awards
    2
    Your posts are still unintelligible to me. Let's back up a bit. For what are you trying to solve? Is the following your integral equation?



    If so, then we note that u = u(t), and the independent variable t is integrated out on the LHS. If x is dependent on t, then the LHS is just a constant, right? You'd have the following:



    The LHS is a constant because the only independent variable in sight has been integrated out. Therefore, x(t) is constant, and you can pull out the exponential the same way as in the second case, which follows.

    Otherwise, if x is independent of t, you can factor out as follows:



    I've been using QuickLaTeX to do the LaTeX rendering here, which you can embed as images. It's not bad, actually.

    Does this make any sense?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Joined
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    9
    I think he dislikes the fact it's a transcendental equation... which is something you can't really deal with, unless LHC in Ackbeet's solution is a particularly nice constant (eg 0). In that case x is either 0 or some some sort of complex infinity. If LHC is non 0 but small and you want a small x solution you can approximate the RHS as



    But generally there are no closed form exact solutions (ie something that looks like x = blah).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    4
    Awards
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by ivalmian View Post
    I think he dislikes the fact it's a transcendental equation... which is something you can't really deal with, unless LHC in Ackbeet's solution is a particularly nice constant (eg 0). In that case x is either 0 or some some sort of complex infinity. If LHC is non 0 but small and you want a small x solution you can approximate the RHS as



    But generally there are no closed form exact solutions (ie something that looks like x = blah).
    Other than the Lambert W function. I suppose it's debatable whether that's really a closed-form solution, though.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. A second Fredholm integral equation
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 19th 2011, 01:30 AM
  2. Homogeneous Fredholm equation of the second kind
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 13th 2010, 08:15 AM
  3. Fredholm integral equation
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 7th 2009, 06:07 AM
  4. Fredholm Integral Equations
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 8th 2008, 10:03 AM
  5. Fredholm Intergral Equation
    Posted in the Advanced Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 6th 2008, 11:32 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum