Hi everybody!
I'm trying to find the Laplace transform of log(t) (Our lecturer promised to give a lot of respect to the one who solve that :) ...)
Can you guys please help me and give me some direction?
Thanks!
Red_Fox
Printable View
Hi everybody!
I'm trying to find the Laplace transform of log(t) (Our lecturer promised to give a lot of respect to the one who solve that :) ...)
Can you guys please help me and give me some direction?
Thanks!
Red_Fox
Have you consided looking it up in a table of Laplace transforms? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Red_Fox
RonL
well... where can I find one? I mean, I didn't find it in the elementry Laplace Transform table!
And by the way, I would like to know the way to find it.
P.S I've found something: (-y+lns)/s , when y is Euler constant (limiting difference between the harmonic series and the natural logarithm).
Maybe you know how they reached this??
Thanks (:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Fox
letthen:
Now if I recall correctly the first integral on the RHS is,
and you should be able to finish the derivation from here.
So not so difficult after all?
By the way my handbook says it is.
RonL
Wow (: it's so simple after t'=st!
By the way , it is very interesting how to reach from this integral (with the e and the ln) to the limiting difference between the harmonic series and the natural logarithm. see also [HTML]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler-Mascheroni_constant[/HTML]
Thank You Very Much!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
you have one little mistake when you put t'
you forgot s is a complex variable
so you changed the intire intigration
you need to prove it still works under complex variabels
can you help me with that?
Its not a mistake, I am using a definition of the Laplace transformQuote:
Originally Posted by mooshazz
for s real.
At least in some places the Laplace transform is defined for s real,
with appropriate continuation being used to extend it to most of
when required.
See attachment for a definition restricted to s-real (I know its
intended for engineers but here it is anyway)
RonL
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
but as a mathmatician i need to prove that for complex s
how can i do it?
This is a bit sketchy as I don't have the relevant reference books toQuote:
Originally Posted by mooshazz
hand, but as you are a mathematician you should be able to fill in the
detail.
1. Show that in this case the Laplace transform is analytic in the right half
plane. You should have a set of conditions for a functions to guarantee
that its Laplace transform has this property.
2. Then the value of the Laplace transform at all points in the right half
plane is uniquely defined by its values on an arc contained in the right half
plane.
3. Any segment of the positive real axis supplies such an arc. The given
Laplace transform with s complex is a function analytic on the right
half plane, which agrees with the real Laplace transform on the real axis,
and so is the complex Laplace transform.
Does that make any sort of sense?
RonL
not even a bitQuote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
i didn't understand any of the stages
at st. 1 did you ment the result of the transform or the interior of the integral
at st. 2 i didn't get anything
and so in stage 3
Stage 2 is key. Roughtly it is the result that a function analytic on a regionQuote:
Originally Posted by mooshazz
is uniquely determined by its values on a curve. If you haven't covered something
like that in Complex Analysis this method is not available to you and you will
have to try evaluating the integral after the change of variable as a line
integral over the lineand see if that works.
RonL
as a hebrew speaker it's a bit difficult for me with mathmatical english
can you explain me those stages in the language of signs and numbers?