L{f′(t)}=sF(s)−f(0)L{f′′(t)}=s2F(s)−sf(0)−f′(0)Read the shape: one factor of s per prime removed, and each derivative you remove "pays a fee" of an initial value. For f′′ the two fees are sf(0) (higher s-power, lower derivative) and f′(0) (lower s-power, higher derivative).
In L{f(n)(t)}, what is the coefficient of f(k)(0)?
Recall Solution
The general rule is
L{f(n)}=snF(s)−sn−1f(0)−sn−2f′(0)−⋯−f(n−1)(0).
The term carrying f(k)(0) is −sn−1−kf(k)(0), so the coefficient is −sn−1−k.
Check with n=2: k=0 gives −s1 (the −sf(0) term); k=1 gives −s0=−1 (the −f′(0) term). ✓
Given f(t)=e2t so F(s)=s−21, compute L{f′(t)} two ways and confirm they agree.
Recall Solution
Way A — differentiate first.f′(t)=2e2t, so L{f′}=s−22.
Way B — use the rule.f(0)=e0=1, so
L{f′}=sF(s)−f(0)=s−2s−1=s−2s−(s−2)=s−22.
Both give s−22. ✓ The −f(0)=−1 was essential — without it we'd get s−2s, which is wrong.
Compute L{f′′(t)} for f(t)=sin2t using the second-derivative rule.
Recall Solution
Here F(s)=s2+42, f(0)=sin0=0, f′(t)=2cos2t so f′(0)=2.
L{f′′}=s2F(s)−sf(0)−f′(0)=s2+42s2−0−2=s2+42s2−2(s2+4)=s2+4−8.Direct check:f′′(t)=−4sin2t, L{−4sin2t}=−4⋅s2+42=s2+4−8. ✓
For which functions is L{f′(t)}=sF(s)exactly true (the boundary term vanishes)? Give the condition and one concrete example.
Recall Solution
The boundary term is −f(0), so it vanishes precisely when f(0)=0.
Example:f(t)=sint has f(0)=0, so L{f′}=sF(s)=s2+1s. Check directly: f′=cost, L{cost}=s2+1s. ✓
Insight: the "clean" formula is not universally wrong — it is a special case that happens exactly at the origin-crossing. It fails the instant your function starts away from zero.
A function is of exponential order: ∣f(t)∣≤Mect for large t. Explain, referring to the figure, why the boundary term at t→∞ dies for s>c, so only −f(0) survives.
Recall Solution
The boundary term in the integration by parts is [e−stf(t)]0∞. Look at the figure: the orange curve e−st crushes downward exponentially, while the bluef(t) grows at most like ect. Their product e−stf(t) is bounded by Me−(s−c)t (the green envelope), which →0 as t→∞ whenever s>c.
So the top limit contributes 0. Only the bottom limit t=0 remains, giving −e0f(0)=−f(0). This is the entire reason the formula reads sF(s)−f(0) and not something with a surviving tail. If s≤c the integral would diverge and the transform wouldn't exist — see Exponential Order and Convergence of Integrals.
Show, by re-deriving with Integration by Parts, that the second-derivative rule really follows from applying the first-derivative rule to g=f′.
Recall Solution
Let g(t)=f′(t). The first rule applies to any nice function, so
L{g′}=sL{g}−g(0).
Now g′=f′′, L{g}=L{f′}=sF(s)−f(0), and g(0)=f′(0). Substitute:
L{f′′}=s(sF(s)−f(0))−f′(0)=s2F(s)−sf(0)−f′(0). ✓
Why it works: the rule "removes one prime for one s and one fee." Removing two primes just runs the same move twice — no new integration needed. That is the inductive engine behind the general snF(s)−⋯ pattern.
Transform:(s2Y−sy(0)−y′(0))+4Y=0.
Insert ICs: s2Y−s−0+4Y=0⇒(s2+4)Y=s.
Solve:Y=s2+4s.
Invert: this is exactly L{cos2t}, so y(t)=cos2t.
Check:y′′=−4cos2t=−4y, so y′′+4y=0 ✓; y(0)=1 ✓, y′(0)=−2sin0=0 ✓.
Solve the second-order IVP with both ICs nonzero: y′′−3y′+2y=0,y(0)=2,y′(0)=3.
Recall Solution
Transform each term using the rules:
L{y′′}=s2Y−sy(0)−y′(0)=s2Y−2s−3
L{−3y′}=−3(sY−y(0))=−3sY+6
L{2y}=2Y
Sum =0:
(s2Y−2s−3)+(−3sY+6)+2Y=0⇒(s2−3s+2)Y=2s−3.Factor:s2−3s+2=(s−1)(s−2), so Y=(s−1)(s−2)2s−3.
Partial fractions:(s−1)(s−2)2s−3=s−1A+s−2B. Then 2s−3=A(s−2)+B(s−1). Set s=1: −1=A(−1)⇒A=1. Set s=2: 1=B(1)⇒B=1.
Y=s−11+s−21⇒y(t)=et+e2t.Check:y′=et+2e2t, y′′=et+4e2t; y′′−3y′+2y=(1−3+2)et+(4−6+2)e2t=0 ✓; y(0)=1+1=2 ✓; y′(0)=1+2=3 ✓.
Solve y′′+y=0,y(0)=0,y′(0)=2, and identify which single IC each surviving term traces back to.
Recall Solution
Transform:s2Y−sy(0)−y′(0)+Y=0⇒s2Y−0−2+Y=0⇒(s2+1)Y=2.
Y=s2+12=2⋅s2+11⇒y(t)=2sint.Tracing the ICs: the −sy(0) term vanished because y(0)=0 — that removed any cost piece. The −y′(0)=−2 term is the sole survivor, and it produced the sint amplitude 2. So the slope IC alone shaped this answer.
Check:y′′=−2sint=−y ✓; y(0)=0 ✓; y′(0)=2cos0=2 ✓.
A degenerate/limiting problem: solve y′′=0,y(0)=1,y′(0)=4 with Laplace, and note what happens as the "spring constant" in y′′+ky=0 shrinks to k=0.
Recall Solution
Transform:s2Y−sy(0)−y′(0)=0⇒s2Y−s−4=0⇒Y=s2s+4=s1+s24.Invert:L−1{s1}=1, L−1{s21}=t, so
y(t)=1+4t.Check:y′=4, y′′=0 ✓; y(0)=1 ✓; y′(0)=4 ✓.
Limiting insight: for y′′+ky=0 the frequency is k. As k→0, sin(kt)/k→t and cos(kt)→1, so the oscillation "unrolls" into the straight line y(0)+y′(0)t. The k=0 case is the degenerate limit where the two initial conditions map straight to the intercept and slope of a line — no oscillation at all.
Recall One-line self-test summary
Every solution above passed three checks: the ODE itself, the value IC, and (for 2nd order) the slope IC. If any check fails, you almost certainly dropped a fee term −sn−1−kf(k)(0).