Math 20D Solutions: HW 3

Section 2.5 2. For this problem we do not need to solve the DE, only determine qualitative information about the solutions. We are given dy = ay + by 2 , a > 0, b > 0. dt To nd equilibrium solutions, we set y = 0 = ay + by 2 and solve for y, getting y = 0 and y = a/b as the solutions. Since a and b are both positive, a/b is negative. So the plot of y with respect to y looks like an upward-opening parabola with zeros at a/b and 0. In general for an autonomous equation, an equilibrium y = y0 is stable if y = f (y) is decreasing as it crosses the y axis at y0 , and unstable if it is increasing at y0 . Looking at the graph reveals that ay + by 2 decreasing at y = a/b and increasing at y = 0, so a/b is stable and 0 is unstable. With this information it is not hard to draw the phase line and qualitative plots of solutions. 7. a) To nd equilibrium points we set y = 0 = k(1 y)2 . As long as k is nonzero, this equation has only one solution, y = 1. b) The plot of y = f (y) = k(1 y)2 is clearly going to be an upward opening parabola with a vertex at y = 1. (Since k > 0 it is upward opening.) If y = 1, y is always positive. This means on either side of the equilibrium y = 1, solutions increase. In other words, a solution with initial value less than 1 will converge to the equilibrium, while a solution with initial value greater than 1 will diverge to . This is a so-called semistable equilibrium. c) This is a separable equation, so we rearrange and integrate: dy = k(1 y)2 Using u-substitution with u = 1 y and integrating gives 1 = t + C. k(1 y) The initial condition is y(0) = y0 , so solving for C gives C = 1/(k(1 y0 )). Now we must solve 1 1 =t+ k(1 y) k(1 y0 ) for y. This is just algebra and we eventually get y= y0 + (1 y0 )kt . 1 + (1 y0 )kt dt.

To verify this has a semistable equilibrium we need to show that solutions with y0 < 1 must converge to y = 1 and solutions with y0 > 1 must diverge. At rst glance you might think that all solutions have to converge to y = 1, since as t , y 1. However, this is NOT true because the solutions may blow up in a nite amount of time (i.e., they may have an asymptote). If y0 > 1 then the denominator starts out at 1 when t = 0, but as t increases, (1 y0 )kt becomes more and more negative. This implies that the denominator reaches zero at some point when t is positive, so the solution diverges to positive innity, as we predicted. On the other hand, if y0 < 1 then the solution does exist for all (positive) time, since the denominator is positive for t > 0, so the conclusion y 1 is valid. 15. a) The solution to the logistic equation was given in the book as y= y0 K . y0 + (K y0 )ert 1

y0 is the population at time zero, which we set equal to K/3. The population will have doubled when y = 2K/3, so this is just a matter of plugging these values into the equation and solving for t. The Ks cancel and we eventually get = ln 4/r or = 55.452 years if r = 0.025. b) Starting from the solution, if we divide both sides by K and then divide the numerator and the denominator through by K we will get: y y0 /K , = K y0 /K + (1 y0 /K)ert or = . + (1 )ert Solving this gives T = 1 (1 ) ln . r (1 )

Since both and 1 are factors of the denominator, as 0 or 1, T will go to positive innity. 22. a) To nd equilibrium points, we set y = 0 = y(1 y). This gives y = 0, y = 1 as equilibrium solutions. Since is positive, this is a downward-pointing parabola which implies that y is increasing as it crosses the y-axis when y = 0, so 0 is an unstable equilibrium. It will be decreasing when y = 1, so 1 is a stable equilibrium. b) Like all autonomous equations this is separable. To solve it we integrate: dy = y(1 y) dt.

This integral can be done by using partial fractions or by using a computer, giving ln y ln(1 y) = t + C. Taking the exponential of both sides gives y = Cet . 1y At this point we may solve for the initial condition, getting C = y0 /(1 y0 ). Solving for y and rearranging a bit nally gives: y0 y= . y0 + (1 y0 )et Assuming that y0 > 0 (which is highly logical since y is supposed to represent a fraction of a population) it can be seen that all solutions will converge to y = 1. This is because the denominator will always be positive when t is positive, so the solution will exist for all t > 0, and when t is very large clearly y is close to 1. This shows 1 is a stable equilibrium, and that 0 behaves like an unstable equilibrium for y0 > 0. We just need to check that solutions with y0 < 0 diverge away from 0, to show 0 is unstable. This is tricky since it appears that all solutions will converge to 1, but again, this is only true if the solution exists for all positive time. Carefully looking at the denominator will show that if y0 < 0, it will equal zero for some positive value of t, which means the solutions will blow up to negative innity. Section 2.6 4. This equation has the form M (x, y) + N (x, y)y = 0. To check whether it is really exact, we need to check that N M = . y y Here M = 2xy 2 + 2y and N = 2x2 y + 2x, and both partials are equal to 4xy + 2, so the equation is exact and can be written as d (x, y) = 0 dx 2

for some function (x, y). To nd we can use partial integration to integrate both sides of the following: (x, y) = M (x, y) = 2xy 2 + 2y. x Integrating both sides with respect to x and treating y as a constant gives that (x, y) = x2 y 2 + 2yx + C(y). Note that since we are treating y as constant, the constant of integration is actually an unknown function of y and not just a number. To nd C(y) we can use that y = N (x, y) = 2x2 y + 2x. Taking the partial with respect to y of our formula (x, y) = x2 y 2 + 2yx + C(y) and using this fact gives that 2x2 y + 2x + C (y) = 2x2 y + 2x. Thus, C (y) = 0 and C(y) is just a constant. We could have stopped after the partial integration and assumed C was a constant and gotten the right answer in this case, but in general this step is necessary and you may get the wrong answer if it is skipped. The nal implicit solution for y is that (x, y) = x2 y 2 + 2yx + C = 0. 9. Checking the condition for partial derivatives (or looking in the back of the book if you are lazy) conrms that this equation is exact. To nd the function (x, y) we must do partial integration on one of the functions N (x, y) or M (x, y). Inspection shows that it will be far easier to partially integrate N (x, y) since this will be with respect to y and N has only a single y. We get: (x, y) = (xexy cos 2x 3)dy = exy cos 2x 3y + C(x)

where C(x) is an unknown function of x. To nd C(x), we use that x = M (x, y) = yexy cos 2x2exy sin 2x+ 2x. Taking the partial with respect to x of the function we got by integrating and setting it equal to M shows that C (x) = 2x and C(x) = x2 + C. So the nal answer is (x, y) = exy cos 2x 3y + x2 + C = 0. 15. For this equation to be exact, we must have that My = Nx everywhere. So we must have 2xy + bx2 = 3x2 + 2xy, which implies b = 3. Partially integrating M gives: (x, y) = (xy 2 + 3x2 y)dx = x2 y 2 /2 + x3 y + C(y).

Taking the partial of this with respect to y and setting it equal to N shows C (y) = 0, so C(y) is a constant. The nal implicit solution for y is x2 y 2 /2 + x3 y + C = 0. 22. After multiplying through by the integrating factor xex , the equation becomes xex (x + 2) sin y + (x2 ex x cos y)y = 0. A tedious computation with partial derivatives will show that the equation is now exact. Like in problem 9, carefully choosing the term to partially integrate will make this problem drastically easier. In this case we will want to integrate N with respect to y since it has only one y. We get that (x, y) = x2 ex sin y + C(x). Taking the partial with respect to x of this and setting it equal to M will show that C (x) = 0 and C is a constant. The nal implicit solution is x2 ex sin y + C = 0.