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.










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 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















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.










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 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













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.










share|cite|improve this question













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






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










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














  • 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















active

oldest

votes











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















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





































active

oldest

votes













active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes
















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














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




















































































Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

Puebla de Zaragoza

Musa