Re: Result to DEQ with WA versus Step-by-Step Yields

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg132311] Re: Result to DEQ with WA versus Step-by-Step Yields
• From: amzoti <amzoti at gmail.com>
• Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 08:08:27 -0500 (EST)
• Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
• Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
• Delivered-to: mathgroup-outx@smc.vnet.net
• Delivered-to: mathgroup-newsendx@smc.vnet.net
• References: <20140201055416.D6FE16A13@smc.vnet.net> <lckifh\$1gr\$1@smc.vnet.net>

On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:44:33 PM UTC-8, Bob Hanlon wrote:
> The step-by-step solution provides the result for t >= 0
>
>
>
>
>
> sol = ((WolframAlpha[
>
>        "v''+10 v'+125 v=250 unitstep(t),v(0)=0,v'(0)=25",
>
>        {{"DifferentialEquationSolution", 1}, "Output"}] //
>
>       ReleaseHold)[[1]]) // ToRules
>
>
>
>
>
> {v[t] -> ((5/2)*Sin[10*t])/E^(5*t) +
>
>        (((-(5/2))*Sin[10*t])/E^(5*t) +
>
>             ((1/2)*(4*E^(5*t) - 4*Cos[10*t] + 3*Sin[10*t]))/
>
>               E^(5*t))*UnitStep[t]}
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Simplify[sol, t >= 0]
>
>
>
>
>
> {v[t] -> 2 - (2*Cos[10*t])/E^(5*t) +
>
>        ((3/2)*Sin[10*t])/E^(5*t)}
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob Hanlon
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:54 AM, amzoti <amzoti at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > When you solve this DEW using WA, you get a result.
>
> >
>
> > However, when you click step-by-step, the result is different.
>
> >
>
> > Is this a bug?
>
> >
>
> > v'' + 10 v' + 125 v = 250 unitstep(t), v(0) = 0, v'(0) = 25
>
> >
>
> > Thanks
>
> >
>
> >

Thanks all!

Bob Hanlon: I see that you reply to many posting with excellent feedback.

I have always wondered (as your posts are different than many in a very good way), how did you learn Mathematica so well?

What approach and/or references did you use?

Regards -A

• Prev by Date: Re: ContourPlot3d labels
• Next by Date: animation of the PDE
• Previous by thread: Re: Result to DEQ with WA versus Step-by-Step Yields
• Next by thread: Re: Result to DEQ with WA versus Step-by-Step Yields