4.8 D’Alembert Solution of The Wave Equation
We have solved the wave equation by using Fourier series. But it is often more convenient to use the so-called d’Alembert solution to the wave equation.to the power 1 While this solution can be derived using Fourier series as well, it is really an awkward use of those concepts. It is easier and more instructive to derive this solution by making a correct change of variables to get an equation that can be solved by simple integration.
Suppose we have the wave equation
We wish to solve the equation (4.8.1) given the conditions
Change of Variables
We will transform the equation into a simpler form where it can be solved by simple integration. We change variables to , . The chain rule says:
We compute
In the above computations, we used the fact from calculus that . We plug what we got into the wave equation,
Therefore, the wave equation (4.8.1) transforms into . It is easy to find the general solution to this equation by integrating twice. Keeping constant, we integrate with respect to firstsquared and notice that the constant of integration depends on ; for each we might get a different constant of integration. We get . Next, we integrate with respect to and notice that the constant of integration must depend on . Thus, . The solution must, therefore, be of the following form for some functions and :
The solution is a superposition of two functions (waves) traveling at speed in opposite directions. The coordinates and are called the characteristic coordinates, and a similar technique can be applied to more complicated hyperbolic PDE. And in fact, in Section 1.9 it is used to solve first order linear PDE. Basically, to solve the wave equation (or more general hyperbolic equations) we find certain characteristic curves along which the equation is really just an ODE, or a pair of ODEs. In this case these are the curves where and are constant.
D’Alembert’s Formula
We know what any solution must look like, but we need to solve for the given side conditions. We will just give the formula and see that it works. First let denote the odd extension of , and let denote the odd extension of . Define
We claim this and give the solution. Explicitly, the solution is or in other words:
Let us check that the d’Alembert formula really works.
So far so good. Assume for simplicity is differentiable. And we use the first form of (4.8.3) as it is easier to differentiate. By the fundamental theorem of calculus we have
So
Yay! We’re smoking now. OK, now the boundary conditions. Note that and are odd. Also is an even function of because is odd (to see this fact, do the substitution ). So
Note that and are periodic. We compute
And voilà, it works.
Another Way to Solve for the Side Conditions
It is perhaps easier and more useful to memorize the procedure rather than the formula itself. The important thing to remember is that a solution to the wave equation is a superposition of two waves traveling in opposite directions. That is,
If you think about it, the exact formulas for and are not hard to guess once you realize what kind of side conditions is supposed to satisfy. Let us give the formula again, but slightly differently. Best approach is to do this in stages. When (and hence ) we have the solution
On the other hand, when (and hence ), we let
The solution in this case is
By superposition we get a solution for the general side conditions (4.8.2) (when neither nor are identically zero).
Do note the minus sign before the , and the in the second denominator.
Warning: Make sure you use the odd extensions and , when you have formulas for and . The thing is, those formulas in general hold only for , and are not usually equal to and for other .
Remarks
Let us remark that the formula is the reason why the solution of the wave equation doesn’t get as time goes on, that is, why in the examples where the initial conditions had corners, the solution also has corners at every time .
The corners bring us to another interesting remark. Nobody ever notices at first that our example solutions are not even differentiable (they have corners): In Example above, the solution is not differentiable whenever or for example. Really to be able to compute or , you need not one, but two derivatives. Fear not, we could think of a shape that is very nearly but does have two derivatives by rounding the corners a little bit, and then the solution would be very nearly and nobody would notice the switch.
One final remark is what the d’Alembert solution tells us about what part of the initial conditions influence the solution at a certain point. We can figure this out by Let us suppose that the string is very long (perhaps infinite) for simplicity. Since the solution at time is
we notice that we have only used the initial conditions in the interval . These two endpoints are called the wavefronts, as that is where the wave front is given an initial () disturbance at . So if , an observer sitting at at time has only seen the initial conditions for in the range and is blissfully unaware of anything else. This is why for example we do not know that a supernova has occurred in the universe until we see its light, millions of years from the time when it did in fact happen.Footnotes
[1] Named after the French mathematician Jean le Rond d’Alembert (1717 – 1783).
[2] There is nothing special about , you can integrate with first, if you wish.
-
- Jiří Lebl (Oklahoma State University).These pages were supported by NSF grants DMS-0900885 and DMS-1362337.
Adapted from Differential Equations for Engineers by Jiří Lebl (Oklahoma State University), hosted on LibreTexts (math.libretexts.org) and licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Changes were made. License: CC-BY-SA-4.0.