Intuition The big picture
Laplace's equation ∇ 2 u = u x x + u y y = 0 \nabla^2 u = u_{xx} + u_{yy} = 0 ∇ 2 u = u xx + u y y = 0 describes a steady state — temperature in a metal plate that has settled, an electrostatic potential, a stretched soap film. Nothing changes in time; the value at every interior point is the average of its neighbours. On a rectangle we are told the values on the four edges (boundary conditions) and asked to fill in the inside.
The trick: guess that the solution is a product u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) Y ( y ) u(x,y)=X(x)Y(y) u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) Y ( y ) . This turns ONE hard PDE in two variables into TWO easy ODEs. We then stack infinitely many such product solutions (a Fourier series) to match whatever boundary data we like.
Definition Dirichlet problem on a rectangle
Find u ( x , y ) u(x,y) u ( x , y ) on 0 < x < a , 0 < y < b 0<x<a,\ 0<y<b 0 < x < a , 0 < y < b satisfying
u x x + u y y = 0 u_{xx}+u_{yy}=0 u xx + u y y = 0
with prescribed values on all four edges. The standard "one nonzero side" case:
u ( 0 , y ) = 0 , u ( a , y ) = 0 , u ( x , 0 ) = 0 , u ( x , b ) = f ( x ) . u(0,y)=0,\quad u(a,y)=0,\quad u(x,0)=0,\quad u(x,b)=f(x). u ( 0 , y ) = 0 , u ( a , y ) = 0 , u ( x , 0 ) = 0 , u ( x , b ) = f ( x ) .
Three homogeneous (zero) sides + one given side. Any rectangle problem is built from four such cases by superposition (solve each nonzero side separately, then add).
WHY only one nonzero side at a time? Laplace's equation is linear and homogeneous , so sums of solutions are solutions. If all four sides are nonzero, split into four sub-problems each with three zero edges, solve each, and add. So mastering the one-side case masters everything.
Assume u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) Y ( y ) u(x,y)=X(x)Y(y) u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) Y ( y ) . Plug in:
X ′ ′ ( x ) Y ( y ) + X ( x ) Y ′ ′ ( y ) = 0. X''(x)Y(y)+X(x)Y''(y)=0. X ′′ ( x ) Y ( y ) + X ( x ) Y ′′ ( y ) = 0.
Divide by X ( x ) Y ( y ) X(x)Y(y) X ( x ) Y ( y ) (legal where neither is zero):
X ′ ′ X + Y ′ ′ Y = 0 ⟹ X ′ ′ X = − Y ′ ′ Y . \frac{X''}{X}+\frac{Y''}{Y}=0 \quad\Longrightarrow\quad \frac{X''}{X}=-\frac{Y''}{Y}. X X ′′ + Y Y ′′ = 0 ⟹ X X ′′ = − Y Y ′′ .
Intuition Why a constant?
The left side depends only on x x x , the right side only on y y y . The only way a pure-x x x thing can equal a pure-y y y thing for all x , y x,y x , y is if both equal the same constant . Call it − λ -\lambda − λ .
X ′ ′ X = − λ , Y ′ ′ Y = λ . \frac{X''}{X}=-\lambda,\qquad \frac{Y''}{Y}=\lambda. X X ′′ = − λ , Y Y ′′ = λ .
We have u ( 0 , y ) = u ( a , y ) = 0 u(0,y)=u(a,y)=0 u ( 0 , y ) = u ( a , y ) = 0 , i.e. X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 X(0)=X(a)=0 X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 . Two zero boundary conditions in x x x ⇒ we need an oscillating X X X (a sine), which forces λ > 0 \lambda>0 λ > 0 . Write λ = k 2 \lambda=k^2 λ = k 2 .
Common mistake Steel-man: "Why not pick
λ < 0 \lambda<0 λ < 0 for X X X ?"
It feels fine because X ′ ′ = λ X X''=\lambda X X ′′ = λ X with λ < 0 \lambda<0 λ < 0 also has solutions (e ± k x e^{\pm kx} e ± k x ). Why it's tempting: the algebra of the ODE works either way. Why it's wrong: with λ ≤ 0 \lambda\le 0 λ ≤ 0 the only solution of X ′ ′ = λ X X''=\lambda X X ′′ = λ X with X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 X(0)=X(a)=0 X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 is the trivial X ≡ 0 X\equiv 0 X ≡ 0 . Exponentials/lines can't vanish at two points without being identically zero. Fix: the boundary conditions choose the sign . Two homogeneous endpoints ⇒ sines ⇒ λ = k 2 > 0 \lambda=k^2>0 λ = k 2 > 0 .
X ′ ′ + k 2 X = 0 ⇒ X = A cos k x + B sin k x . X''+k^2X=0 \Rightarrow X=A\cos kx + B\sin kx. X ′′ + k 2 X = 0 ⇒ X = A cos k x + B sin k x .
X ( 0 ) = 0 ⇒ A = 0 X(0)=0 \Rightarrow A=0 X ( 0 ) = 0 ⇒ A = 0 . So X = B sin k x X=B\sin kx X = B sin k x .
X ( a ) = 0 ⇒ sin k a = 0 ⇒ k a = n π X(a)=0 \Rightarrow \sin ka=0 \Rightarrow ka=n\pi X ( a ) = 0 ⇒ sin k a = 0 ⇒ k a = nπ , n = 1 , 2 , 3 , … n=1,2,3,\dots n = 1 , 2 , 3 , …
k n = n π a , X n ( x ) = sin n π x a \boxed{k_n=\frac{n\pi}{a},\qquad X_n(x)=\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}} k n = a nπ , X n ( x ) = sin a nπ x
These are the eigenfunctions ; λ n = ( n π / a ) 2 \lambda_n=(n\pi/a)^2 λ n = ( nπ / a ) 2 the eigenvalues .
Y ′ ′ − k n 2 Y = 0 ⇒ Y = C cosh n π y a + D sinh n π y a . Y''-k_n^2 Y=0 \Rightarrow Y=C\cosh\frac{n\pi y}{a}+D\sinh\frac{n\pi y}{a}. Y ′′ − k n 2 Y = 0 ⇒ Y = C cosh a nπ y + D sinh a nπ y .
Apply u ( x , 0 ) = 0 ⇒ Y ( 0 ) = 0 ⇒ C = 0 u(x,0)=0 \Rightarrow Y(0)=0 \Rightarrow C=0 u ( x , 0 ) = 0 ⇒ Y ( 0 ) = 0 ⇒ C = 0 . So
Y n ( y ) = sinh n π y a . Y_n(y)=\sinh\frac{n\pi y}{a}. Y n ( y ) = sinh a nπ y .
Intuition Why hyperbolic, not sine, in
y y y ?
The y y y -direction has only one homogeneous side (y = 0 y=0 y = 0 ) and one given side (y = b y=b y = b ). One zero BC doesn't force oscillation. The sign of λ \lambda λ was already fixed (positive) by x x x , so Y ′ ′ = + k 2 Y Y''=+k^2Y Y ′′ = + k 2 Y gives growing/decaying solutions cosh , sinh \cosh,\sinh cosh , sinh . Physically: heat injected at the top decays exponentially as you move down into the plate — it does not wiggle.
Each u n = sin n π x a sinh n π y a u_n=\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}\sinh\frac{n\pi y}{a} u n = sin a nπ x sinh a nπ y solves Laplace with three zero edges. Sum them:
u ( x , y ) = ∑ n = 1 ∞ B n sin n π x a sinh n π y a . u(x,y)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n\,\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}\,\sinh\frac{n\pi y}{a}. u ( x , y ) = ∑ n = 1 ∞ B n sin a nπ x sinh a nπ y .
Impose the final condition u ( x , b ) = f ( x ) u(x,b)=f(x) u ( x , b ) = f ( x ) :
f ( x ) = ∑ n = 1 ∞ ( B n sinh n π b a ) sin n π x a . f(x)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \Big(B_n\sinh\frac{n\pi b}{a}\Big)\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}. f ( x ) = ∑ n = 1 ∞ ( B n sinh a nπ b ) sin a nπ x .
This is just the Fourier sine series of f f f . The bracket is the coefficient:
B n sinh n π b a = 2 a ∫ 0 a f ( x ) sin n π x a d x . B_n\sinh\frac{n\pi b}{a}=\frac{2}{a}\int_0^a f(x)\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}\,dx. B n sinh a nπ b = a 2 ∫ 0 a f ( x ) sin a nπ x d x .
Worked example Example 1 — constant top edge
f ( x ) = u 0 f(x)=u_0 f ( x ) = u 0
Square plate a = b = 1 a=b=1 a = b = 1 , u ( x , 1 ) = u 0 u(x,1)=u_0 u ( x , 1 ) = u 0 , other three sides 0 0 0 .
Coefficient integral. ∫ 0 1 u 0 sin ( n π x ) d x = u 0 ⋅ 1 − cos n π n π = u 0 ( 1 − ( − 1 ) n ) n π \int_0^1 u_0\sin(n\pi x)\,dx = u_0\cdot\frac{1-\cos n\pi}{n\pi}=\frac{u_0(1-(-1)^n)}{n\pi} ∫ 0 1 u 0 sin ( nπ x ) d x = u 0 ⋅ nπ 1 − c o s nπ = nπ u 0 ( 1 − ( − 1 ) n ) .
Why this step? Matching the top edge is a Fourier sine expansion of the constant u 0 u_0 u 0 .
This is 0 0 0 for even n n n , and 2 u 0 n π \frac{2u_0}{n\pi} nπ 2 u 0 for odd n n n .
Divide by sinh n π \sinh n\pi sinh nπ (the Y Y Y normalization at y = b = 1 y=b=1 y = b = 1 ):
B n = 2 sinh n π ⋅ u 0 ( 1 − ( − 1 ) n ) n π . B_n=\frac{2}{\sinh n\pi}\cdot\frac{u_0(1-(-1)^n)}{n\pi}. B n = s i n h nπ 2 ⋅ nπ u 0 ( 1 − ( − 1 ) n ) .
Why? Because u ( x , b ) u(x,b) u ( x , b ) carries the factor sinh n π b a \sinh\frac{n\pi b}{a} sinh a nπ b that must be peeled off.
Answer:
u ( x , y ) = 4 u 0 π ∑ n odd 1 n sinh ( n π y ) sinh ( n π ) sin ( n π x ) . u(x,y)=\frac{4u_0}{\pi}\sum_{n\ \text{odd}}\frac{1}{n}\,\frac{\sinh(n\pi y)}{\sinh(n\pi)}\,\sin(n\pi x). u ( x , y ) = π 4 u 0 ∑ n odd n 1 s i n h ( nπ ) s i n h ( nπ y ) sin ( nπ x ) .
Sanity check: at y = 1 y=1 y = 1 the sinh ratio = 1 =1 = 1 , giving the classic square-wave Fourier series for u 0 u_0 u 0 . ✓ At y = 0 y=0 y = 0 , sinh 0 = 0 ⇒ u = 0 \sinh 0=0\Rightarrow u=0 sinh 0 = 0 ⇒ u = 0 . ✓
Worked example Example 2 — single-mode top
f ( x ) = 5 sin 3 π x a f(x)=5\sin\frac{3\pi x}{a} f ( x ) = 5 sin a 3 π x
Already a single eigenfunction! No integral needed.
Why this step? The sine series of f f f has only the n = 3 n=3 n = 3 term, B 3 sinh 3 π b a = 5 B_3\sinh\frac{3\pi b}{a}=5 B 3 sinh a 3 π b = 5 .
u ( x , y ) = 5 sinh 3 π y a sinh 3 π b a sin 3 π x a . u(x,y)=5\,\frac{\sinh\frac{3\pi y}{a}}{\sinh\frac{3\pi b}{a}}\,\sin\frac{3\pi x}{a}. u ( x , y ) = 5 s i n h a 3 π b s i n h a 3 π y sin a 3 π x .
Why? Each mode is independent (orthogonality of sines), so a pure mode in equals a pure mode out — but reshaped vertically by the sinh \sinh sinh ratio. This is the 80/20 insight : most exam problems hand you f f f already as sines so you skip the integral.
Worked example Example 3 — nonzero LEFT edge instead
u ( 0 , y ) = g ( y ) u(0,y)=g(y) u ( 0 , y ) = g ( y ) , other three sides zero, on 0 < x < a , 0 < y < b 0<x<a,0<y<b 0 < x < a , 0 < y < b .
Why this step? Now the homogeneous direction is y y y (two zero edges at y = 0 , b y=0,b y = 0 , b ), so swap roles: eigenfunctions sin n π y b \sin\frac{n\pi y}{b} sin b nπ y , and the x x x -solution is hyperbolic.
Because the nonzero edge is at x = 0 x=0 x = 0 (not x = a x=a x = a ), use sinh n π ( a − x ) b \sinh\frac{n\pi (a-x)}{b} sinh b nπ ( a − x ) so it vanishes at x = a x=a x = a :
u ( x , y ) = ∑ n B n sinh n π ( a − x ) b sinh n π a b sin n π y b , B n = 2 b ∫ 0 b g ( y ) sin n π y b d y . u(x,y)=\sum_n B_n\,\frac{\sinh\frac{n\pi(a-x)}{b}}{\sinh\frac{n\pi a}{b}}\,\sin\frac{n\pi y}{b},\quad B_n=\frac{2}{b}\int_0^b g(y)\sin\frac{n\pi y}{b}\,dy. u ( x , y ) = ∑ n B n s i n h b nπ a s i n h b nπ ( a − x ) sin b nπ y , B n = b 2 ∫ 0 b g ( y ) sin b nπ y d y .
Why the shifted argument? We need the hyperbolic factor = 0 =0 = 0 on the opposite (zero) edge x = a x=a x = a and = 1 =1 = 1 ·matching on x = 0 x=0 x = 0 . Choosing sinh n π ( a − x ) b \sinh\frac{n\pi(a-x)}{b} sinh b nπ ( a − x ) does exactly that.
Common mistake More steel-manned errors
"I'll use sin \sin sin in y y y too — symmetry!" Feels right because x x x and y y y look symmetric in ∇ 2 u = 0 \nabla^2 u=0 ∇ 2 u = 0 . But the boundary conditions break the symmetry: the direction with two zero edges gets sines, the other gets sinh. Fix: count the homogeneous edges per direction first.
"Forgot to divide by sinh ( n π b / a ) \sinh(n\pi b/a) sinh ( nπ b / a ) ." Tempting because it looks like a plain Fourier series. Fix: the Fourier coefficient equals B n sinh n π b a B_n\sinh\frac{n\pi b}{a} B n sinh a nπ b , not B n B_n B n — isolate B n B_n B n .
"Used cosh \cosh cosh for Y Y Y ." cosh 0 = 1 ≠ 0 \cosh 0=1\ne 0 cosh 0 = 1 = 0 , so it fails u ( x , 0 ) = 0 u(x,0)=0 u ( x , 0 ) = 0 . Only sinh \sinh sinh vanishes at the zero edge.
Recall Feynman: explain to a 12-year-old
Imagine a metal plate that's cold (0°) on three sides and hot on the top. After a while the heat spreads out and settles. We want to know how warm each inside point is. The smart trick: pretend the temperature is "a left-right pattern" times "an up-down pattern." The left-right pattern must be 0 0 0 at both side-walls, so it's a wave that fits exactly (like a guitar string: 1 hump, 2 humps, 3 humps...). The up-down pattern must die away as you go down toward the cold bottom — that's the sinh \sinh sinh , which is 0 0 0 at the bottom and grows toward the hot top. Add up all the guitar-string waves with the right loudness to match the top edge — done!
Mnemonic Remember the split
"Two zeros sing, one zero swings."
Two homogeneous edges in a direction ⇒ sin e (singing/oscillating). One homogeneous edge ⇒ sinh (swings/grows). And: "sinh dies on the cold side" (sinh 0 = 0 \sinh 0=0 sinh 0 = 0 ).
#flashcards/maths
Why does the separation constant have to be a constant? One side depends only on
x x x , the other only on
y y y ; equal for all
x , y x,y x , y ⇒ both equal a common constant.
Which direction gets sine eigenfunctions and why? The direction with TWO homogeneous (zero) boundaries; two zero endpoints force oscillation, only sines vanish at both.
What are the eigenvalues/eigenfunctions for X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 X(0)=X(a)=0 X ( 0 ) = X ( a ) = 0 ? λ n = ( n π / a ) 2 \lambda_n=(n\pi/a)^2 λ n = ( nπ / a ) 2 ,
X n = sin ( n π x / a ) X_n=\sin(n\pi x/a) X n = sin ( nπ x / a ) ,
n = 1 , 2 , … n=1,2,\dots n = 1 , 2 , … Why sinh \sinh sinh (not cosh \cosh cosh or sine) in the y y y -direction here? Sign of
λ \lambda λ is fixed positive by
x x x , giving
Y ′ ′ = k 2 Y Y''=k^2Y Y ′′ = k 2 Y ⇒ hyperbolic; need
Y ( 0 ) = 0 Y(0)=0 Y ( 0 ) = 0 so pick
sinh \sinh sinh since
sinh 0 = 0 \sinh 0=0 sinh 0 = 0 .
Final form of u ( x , y ) u(x,y) u ( x , y ) for top edge f ( x ) f(x) f ( x ) ? ∑ n B n sin n π x a sinh n π y a \sum_n B_n\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}\sinh\frac{n\pi y}{a} ∑ n B n sin a nπ x sinh a nπ y .
Formula for B n B_n B n ? B n = 2 a sinh ( n π b / a ) ∫ 0 a f ( x ) sin n π x a d x B_n=\dfrac{2}{a\sinh(n\pi b/a)}\int_0^a f(x)\sin\frac{n\pi x}{a}\,dx B n = a sinh ( nπ b / a ) 2 ∫ 0 a f ( x ) sin a nπ x d x .
How do you handle all four edges nonzero? Split into four problems (each one nonzero edge), solve separately, superpose (linearity).
If f ( x ) = 5 sin ( 3 π x / a ) f(x)=5\sin(3\pi x/a) f ( x ) = 5 sin ( 3 π x / a ) , what is u u u ? 5 sinh ( 3 π y / a ) sinh ( 3 π b / a ) sin 3 π x a 5\,\dfrac{\sinh(3\pi y/a)}{\sinh(3\pi b/a)}\sin\frac{3\pi x}{a} 5 sinh ( 3 π b / a ) sinh ( 3 π y / a ) sin a 3 π x (single mode, no integral).
What goes wrong if you use cosh \cosh cosh for Y Y Y ? cosh 0 = 1 ≠ 0 \cosh 0=1\ne0 cosh 0 = 1 = 0 , violates
u ( x , 0 ) = 0 u(x,0)=0 u ( x , 0 ) = 0 .
Physical meaning of Laplace's equation? Steady state; each point's value is the average of its neighbours (no sources, no time change).
Fourier sine series — the engine that computes B n B_n B n .
Separation of variables — the general method (also used for Heat equation 1D , Wave equation 1D ).
Sturm–Liouville eigenvalue problems — why sin ( n π x / a ) \sin(n\pi x/a) sin ( nπ x / a ) are orthogonal eigenfunctions.
Hyperbolic functions sinh cosh — the decaying/growing y y y -profiles.
Superposition principle — splitting the four-edge problem.
Harmonic functions and mean value property — the "average of neighbours" picture.
Heat equation 1D — same eigenfunctions, but e − λ t e^{-\lambda t} e − λ t instead of sinh \sinh sinh .
Dirichlet problem on rectangle
lambda=k^2 greater than 0
Eigenfunctions sin nPix/a
Fourier series superposition
Intuition Hinglish mein samjho
Dekho, Laplace equation u x x + u y y = 0 u_{xx}+u_{yy}=0 u xx + u y y = 0 ka matlab hai ek steady state — jaise ek metal plate jiska temperature ab settle ho gaya, ya electric potential. Har andar ke point ki value uske aas-paas ke points ka average hoti hai. Humein chaaron edges pe values di jaati hain (boundary conditions) aur andar ka pattern nikaalna hota hai.
Trick simple hai: maan lo u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) ⋅ Y ( y ) u(x,y)=X(x)\cdot Y(y) u ( x , y ) = X ( x ) ⋅ Y ( y ) — yaani ek "left-right pattern" times ek "up-down pattern". Isse ek mushkil PDE do aasaan ODE ban jaati hain. Jis direction mein do zero edges hain, wahan solution ek sine wave hota hai (jaise guitar ki string — 1 hump, 2 hump...), kyunki sirf sine hi dono ends pe zero ho sakta hai. Doosri direction mein, jahan ek hi zero edge hai, solution sinh hota hai — kyunki sinh 0 = 0 \sinh 0=0 sinh 0 = 0 aur woh exponentially grow/decay karta hai, oscillate nahi. Yaad rakho: "do zero sing, ek zero swing".
Last step: nonzero edge f ( x ) f(x) f ( x ) ko match karne ke liye sabhi sine modes ko jod do — yeh bilkul Fourier sine series hai. Coefficient B n B_n B n nikaalte waqt yaad rakho ki usmein sinh ( n π b / a ) \sinh(n\pi b/a) sinh ( nπ b / a ) ka factor divide karna hai, warna galat answer aayega. Agar f ( x ) f(x) f ( x ) already ek single sine ho (jaise 5 sin 3 π x 5\sin 3\pi x 5 sin 3 π x ), toh integral karne ki zaroorat hi nahi — seedha ek hi mode! Yeh 80/20 wala point exam mein bahut kaam aata hai. Agar chaaron edges nonzero hain, toh linearity se chaar alag problems mein tod do, har ek solve karo, phir add kar do.