Getting Canonical Coordinates in differential equations from Lie Group












0














I've been trying to understand how Lie Groups can help solve differential equations (this 12-page pdf is the most straightforward explanation I've seen).



My understanding is that when a first-order differential equation $frac{dy}{dx}=h(x,y)$ has a continuous "translation symmetry" $(x,y)mapsto(x,y+lambda)$, it becomes very easy to solve the equation using basic integration of one variable.



The problem is that most differential equations in standard $(x,y)$ coordinates don't have this nice translation symmetry, and so we need to change to a set of "canonical coordinates" $(X,Y)$ which do have the desired translation symmetry $(X,Y)mapsto(X,Y+lambda)$.



The main condition that these new canonical coordinates need to satisfy, is that the $Y$ coordinate should be aligned with the $lambda$ variable ($frac{dY}{dlambda}=1,frac{dX}{dlambda}=0$), so that we get the nice translation symmetry we want:



$$frac{dY}{dlambda}=frac{dY}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dY}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=Y_xxi+Y_yeta=1$$



$$frac{dX}{dlambda}=frac{dX}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dX}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=X_xxi+X_yeta=0$$



We also require that the symmetry condition be satisfied:



$$frac{dY}{dX}=frac{D_xY}{D_xX}=frac{Y_x+Y_y y'}{X_x+X_y y'}=h(X,Y)$$



Here's where I'm stuck. Basically all the terms in the above equations are unknowns, and it seems incredibly difficult to solve for the new coordinates $(X,Y)$. I've also seen the "linearized symmetry condition" below, but it still results in a difficult-to-solve equation:



$$eta_x-xi_y h^2 +(eta_y -xi_x)h - (xi h_x + eta h_y) = 0$$



Is there a nice, algorithmic approach for deducing a set of canonical coordinates? Or does it ultimately come down to "guess and check" with the above equation?










share|cite|improve this question



























    0














    I've been trying to understand how Lie Groups can help solve differential equations (this 12-page pdf is the most straightforward explanation I've seen).



    My understanding is that when a first-order differential equation $frac{dy}{dx}=h(x,y)$ has a continuous "translation symmetry" $(x,y)mapsto(x,y+lambda)$, it becomes very easy to solve the equation using basic integration of one variable.



    The problem is that most differential equations in standard $(x,y)$ coordinates don't have this nice translation symmetry, and so we need to change to a set of "canonical coordinates" $(X,Y)$ which do have the desired translation symmetry $(X,Y)mapsto(X,Y+lambda)$.



    The main condition that these new canonical coordinates need to satisfy, is that the $Y$ coordinate should be aligned with the $lambda$ variable ($frac{dY}{dlambda}=1,frac{dX}{dlambda}=0$), so that we get the nice translation symmetry we want:



    $$frac{dY}{dlambda}=frac{dY}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dY}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=Y_xxi+Y_yeta=1$$



    $$frac{dX}{dlambda}=frac{dX}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dX}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=X_xxi+X_yeta=0$$



    We also require that the symmetry condition be satisfied:



    $$frac{dY}{dX}=frac{D_xY}{D_xX}=frac{Y_x+Y_y y'}{X_x+X_y y'}=h(X,Y)$$



    Here's where I'm stuck. Basically all the terms in the above equations are unknowns, and it seems incredibly difficult to solve for the new coordinates $(X,Y)$. I've also seen the "linearized symmetry condition" below, but it still results in a difficult-to-solve equation:



    $$eta_x-xi_y h^2 +(eta_y -xi_x)h - (xi h_x + eta h_y) = 0$$



    Is there a nice, algorithmic approach for deducing a set of canonical coordinates? Or does it ultimately come down to "guess and check" with the above equation?










    share|cite|improve this question

























      0












      0








      0







      I've been trying to understand how Lie Groups can help solve differential equations (this 12-page pdf is the most straightforward explanation I've seen).



      My understanding is that when a first-order differential equation $frac{dy}{dx}=h(x,y)$ has a continuous "translation symmetry" $(x,y)mapsto(x,y+lambda)$, it becomes very easy to solve the equation using basic integration of one variable.



      The problem is that most differential equations in standard $(x,y)$ coordinates don't have this nice translation symmetry, and so we need to change to a set of "canonical coordinates" $(X,Y)$ which do have the desired translation symmetry $(X,Y)mapsto(X,Y+lambda)$.



      The main condition that these new canonical coordinates need to satisfy, is that the $Y$ coordinate should be aligned with the $lambda$ variable ($frac{dY}{dlambda}=1,frac{dX}{dlambda}=0$), so that we get the nice translation symmetry we want:



      $$frac{dY}{dlambda}=frac{dY}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dY}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=Y_xxi+Y_yeta=1$$



      $$frac{dX}{dlambda}=frac{dX}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dX}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=X_xxi+X_yeta=0$$



      We also require that the symmetry condition be satisfied:



      $$frac{dY}{dX}=frac{D_xY}{D_xX}=frac{Y_x+Y_y y'}{X_x+X_y y'}=h(X,Y)$$



      Here's where I'm stuck. Basically all the terms in the above equations are unknowns, and it seems incredibly difficult to solve for the new coordinates $(X,Y)$. I've also seen the "linearized symmetry condition" below, but it still results in a difficult-to-solve equation:



      $$eta_x-xi_y h^2 +(eta_y -xi_x)h - (xi h_x + eta h_y) = 0$$



      Is there a nice, algorithmic approach for deducing a set of canonical coordinates? Or does it ultimately come down to "guess and check" with the above equation?










      share|cite|improve this question













      I've been trying to understand how Lie Groups can help solve differential equations (this 12-page pdf is the most straightforward explanation I've seen).



      My understanding is that when a first-order differential equation $frac{dy}{dx}=h(x,y)$ has a continuous "translation symmetry" $(x,y)mapsto(x,y+lambda)$, it becomes very easy to solve the equation using basic integration of one variable.



      The problem is that most differential equations in standard $(x,y)$ coordinates don't have this nice translation symmetry, and so we need to change to a set of "canonical coordinates" $(X,Y)$ which do have the desired translation symmetry $(X,Y)mapsto(X,Y+lambda)$.



      The main condition that these new canonical coordinates need to satisfy, is that the $Y$ coordinate should be aligned with the $lambda$ variable ($frac{dY}{dlambda}=1,frac{dX}{dlambda}=0$), so that we get the nice translation symmetry we want:



      $$frac{dY}{dlambda}=frac{dY}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dY}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=Y_xxi+Y_yeta=1$$



      $$frac{dX}{dlambda}=frac{dX}{dx}frac{dx}{dlambda}+frac{dX}{dy}frac{dy}{dlambda}=X_xxi+X_yeta=0$$



      We also require that the symmetry condition be satisfied:



      $$frac{dY}{dX}=frac{D_xY}{D_xX}=frac{Y_x+Y_y y'}{X_x+X_y y'}=h(X,Y)$$



      Here's where I'm stuck. Basically all the terms in the above equations are unknowns, and it seems incredibly difficult to solve for the new coordinates $(X,Y)$. I've also seen the "linearized symmetry condition" below, but it still results in a difficult-to-solve equation:



      $$eta_x-xi_y h^2 +(eta_y -xi_x)h - (xi h_x + eta h_y) = 0$$



      Is there a nice, algorithmic approach for deducing a set of canonical coordinates? Or does it ultimately come down to "guess and check" with the above equation?







      differential-equations lie-groups






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 24 at 22:52









      eigenchris

      1,520616




      1,520616



























          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',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          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%2f3012200%2fgetting-canonical-coordinates-in-differential-equations-from-lie-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012200%2fgetting-canonical-coordinates-in-differential-equations-from-lie-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Plaza Victoria

          In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

          How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...