Applying Chain Rule to Dimensionless Transformation
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Hello I am trying to show that the equation
$frac{dN}{dt} = rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K})$
can be rewritten in a dimensionless form as
$frac{dy}{dx} = lambda y(1 - y(x - 1))$
using the transformations $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$.
So far my attempt at the problem is to assume $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$. Using the given information of $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$ it seems
$frac{dy}{dN} = frac{1}{K}$ and $frac{dx}{dt} = frac{1}{tau} Rightarrow frac{dt}{dx} = tau$
I then proceeded to substitute this information into $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$,
$frac{dy}{dx} = frac{1}{K}*(rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K}))*tau = rtau(frac{N}{K}(1 - frac{N}{K}(t - tau)) =$
$rtau y(1 - y(t - tau))$
At this point I am unsure if I should try to think of a factor to multiply the last step of my simplification so that I can assume $lambda$ is equal to some factor and then match it with what $frac{dy}{dx}$ is supposed to be or if I made a mistake in how I approached the problem so far and it involves a more complicated understanding of how to apply the chain rule. Needless to say in my simplification it should be noted that the inside function of $y = frac{N}{K}$ currently is in the same form of $(t - tau)$ as it is in $frac{dN}{dt}$ but by multiplying by $frac{1}{tau}$ the resultant inside will be of the form $(frac{t}{tau} - frac{tau}{tau}) = (x - 1)$. So my question is what needs to be done to further proceed along this problem? Any help would be much appreciated, thanks.
derivatives transformation chain-rule
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Hello I am trying to show that the equation
$frac{dN}{dt} = rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K})$
can be rewritten in a dimensionless form as
$frac{dy}{dx} = lambda y(1 - y(x - 1))$
using the transformations $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$.
So far my attempt at the problem is to assume $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$. Using the given information of $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$ it seems
$frac{dy}{dN} = frac{1}{K}$ and $frac{dx}{dt} = frac{1}{tau} Rightarrow frac{dt}{dx} = tau$
I then proceeded to substitute this information into $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$,
$frac{dy}{dx} = frac{1}{K}*(rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K}))*tau = rtau(frac{N}{K}(1 - frac{N}{K}(t - tau)) =$
$rtau y(1 - y(t - tau))$
At this point I am unsure if I should try to think of a factor to multiply the last step of my simplification so that I can assume $lambda$ is equal to some factor and then match it with what $frac{dy}{dx}$ is supposed to be or if I made a mistake in how I approached the problem so far and it involves a more complicated understanding of how to apply the chain rule. Needless to say in my simplification it should be noted that the inside function of $y = frac{N}{K}$ currently is in the same form of $(t - tau)$ as it is in $frac{dN}{dt}$ but by multiplying by $frac{1}{tau}$ the resultant inside will be of the form $(frac{t}{tau} - frac{tau}{tau}) = (x - 1)$. So my question is what needs to be done to further proceed along this problem? Any help would be much appreciated, thanks.
derivatives transformation chain-rule
1
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Hello I am trying to show that the equation
$frac{dN}{dt} = rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K})$
can be rewritten in a dimensionless form as
$frac{dy}{dx} = lambda y(1 - y(x - 1))$
using the transformations $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$.
So far my attempt at the problem is to assume $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$. Using the given information of $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$ it seems
$frac{dy}{dN} = frac{1}{K}$ and $frac{dx}{dt} = frac{1}{tau} Rightarrow frac{dt}{dx} = tau$
I then proceeded to substitute this information into $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$,
$frac{dy}{dx} = frac{1}{K}*(rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K}))*tau = rtau(frac{N}{K}(1 - frac{N}{K}(t - tau)) =$
$rtau y(1 - y(t - tau))$
At this point I am unsure if I should try to think of a factor to multiply the last step of my simplification so that I can assume $lambda$ is equal to some factor and then match it with what $frac{dy}{dx}$ is supposed to be or if I made a mistake in how I approached the problem so far and it involves a more complicated understanding of how to apply the chain rule. Needless to say in my simplification it should be noted that the inside function of $y = frac{N}{K}$ currently is in the same form of $(t - tau)$ as it is in $frac{dN}{dt}$ but by multiplying by $frac{1}{tau}$ the resultant inside will be of the form $(frac{t}{tau} - frac{tau}{tau}) = (x - 1)$. So my question is what needs to be done to further proceed along this problem? Any help would be much appreciated, thanks.
derivatives transformation chain-rule
Hello I am trying to show that the equation
$frac{dN}{dt} = rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K})$
can be rewritten in a dimensionless form as
$frac{dy}{dx} = lambda y(1 - y(x - 1))$
using the transformations $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$.
So far my attempt at the problem is to assume $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$. Using the given information of $y = frac{N}{K}$ and $x = frac{t}{tau}$ it seems
$frac{dy}{dN} = frac{1}{K}$ and $frac{dx}{dt} = frac{1}{tau} Rightarrow frac{dt}{dx} = tau$
I then proceeded to substitute this information into $frac{dy}{dx} = frac{dy}{dN}*frac{dN}{dt}*frac{dt}{dx}$,
$frac{dy}{dx} = frac{1}{K}*(rN(1 - frac{N(t - tau)}{K}))*tau = rtau(frac{N}{K}(1 - frac{N}{K}(t - tau)) =$
$rtau y(1 - y(t - tau))$
At this point I am unsure if I should try to think of a factor to multiply the last step of my simplification so that I can assume $lambda$ is equal to some factor and then match it with what $frac{dy}{dx}$ is supposed to be or if I made a mistake in how I approached the problem so far and it involves a more complicated understanding of how to apply the chain rule. Needless to say in my simplification it should be noted that the inside function of $y = frac{N}{K}$ currently is in the same form of $(t - tau)$ as it is in $frac{dN}{dt}$ but by multiplying by $frac{1}{tau}$ the resultant inside will be of the form $(frac{t}{tau} - frac{tau}{tau}) = (x - 1)$. So my question is what needs to be done to further proceed along this problem? Any help would be much appreciated, thanks.
derivatives transformation chain-rule
derivatives transformation chain-rule
asked yesterday
Jmath99
775
775
1
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday
add a comment |
1
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday
1
1
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997871%2fapplying-chain-rule-to-dimensionless-transformation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
$y = N/K$ is a little bit imprecise. More accurate is $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$. Does that help?
– eyeballfrog
yesterday
@eyeballfrog So should I just distribute $tau$ in the inside function while letting $lambda = r$ to get the desired form or do I need to reassess what $frac{dy}{dN}$ should be using the more precise form of $y(x) = N(tau x)/K$?
– Jmath99
yesterday