Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The following is an excerpt from Landau's Course on Theoretical Physics Vol.1 Mechanics:

... we should recall the fact that every first-order partial differential equation has a solution depending on an arbitrary function; such a solution is called the general integral of the equation. In mechanical applications, the general integral of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation is less important than a complete integral, which contains as many independent arbitrary constants as there are independent variables.

Can someone clarify what's a complete integral and what's a general integral of a first order partial differential equation?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

The notion "complete integral" here refers to solutions of specific (1st order) PDEs that depend on the maximal number of constants of motion. If you want a concrete example I can refer you to Equation (10) of this paper, or even better to Ref. [10] in that paper.

A "general solution", by contrast, need not depend explicitly on constants of motion, but usually contains some free (integration) function. As an example for a solution not depending explicitly on constants of motion see the "enveloping solution" in Eq. (11) of the paper above.

[I never encountered these notions anywhere, except when solving Hamilton-Jacobi equations - this seems to be also the context to which Landau refers.]

share|cite|improve this answer
    
Landau does refer to Hamilton-Jacobi equations. Can you point me to some other references where the same notions are used relating to Hamilton-Jacobi equations (in classical mechanics)? Perhaps seeing them will clarify me. – becko Aug 18 '11 at 3:08
1  
I can refer you to the book mentioned in the paper I referred to in my reply. It is, however, in German: E. Kamke, Differentialgleichungen, Vol II. But I am sure there is some English book dealing with this. You might try e.g. A. D. Polyanin, V. F. Zaitsev, and A. Moussiaux, Handbook of First Order Partial Differential Equations, Taylor & Francis, London, 2002. The notion of "complete integral" and "general solution" is also defined on this useful webpage: eqworld.ipmnet.ru/en/solutions/fpde/fpdetoc3.htm – Daniel Grumiller Aug 18 '11 at 5:52

In Russian "integral" is a synonym of a solution of differential equation. "general integral" means general solution, "complete" probably means sum of particular solution and general solution (called the complementary solution)

iPDEs

share|cite|improve this answer
2  
This answer is very confusing. Particular solution usually means a solution to an inhomogeneous equation while what you and your reference mean is the same general solution, only with some boundary/initial conditions plugged-in. – Marek Aug 16 '11 at 6:19
    
thx, I corrected – IljaBek Aug 16 '11 at 7:51

In the general theory of partial differential equations and specifically for First-Order Partial Differential Equations one defines the general solution(Landau's general integral) and the complete integral as follows:

For a first order partial differential equation $$f(x,y,z,z_x,z_y)=0 \tag{1}$$ Complete Integral: A two parameter family of solutions (2) of (1) is called a complete integral of the partial differential equation $$\phi(x,y,a,b) \tag{2}$$ General solution: A function of the form (3), where $u(x,y,z)$ and $v(x,y,z)$ and $\Phi$ is an arbitrary smooth function, is called a (implicit or explicit) general solution of (1) if $z,z_x,z_y$ as determined by the relation (3) satisfy (1) $$\Phi(u,v)=0\tag{3}$$

*If we have a complete integral (2) of (1), we can derive a general solution (3), but first let's see how to derive the PDE (1) from the complete integral (2).

If we have a complete integral (2), we can obtain $d\phi/dx$ and $d\phi/dy$: $$\phi_x+z_x\phi_z=0 \tag{4}$$ $$\phi_y+z_y\phi_z=0 \tag{5}$$

With (2),(4),(5) we can obtain an expression of the form (1) that is free from the parameters $a$ and $b$. If an expression (1) is obtained satisfying (2),(4),(5) then $\phi$ is a solution of the PDE (1).

Now to derive a general solution (3) we can impose $b=W(a)$ in the complete solution (2), obtaining $\Phi(x,y,z,a,W(a))$, and impose the condition $d\Phi/da=0$, $$\frac{d\Phi}{da}=\Phi_a(x,y,z,a,W(a))+W'(a)\Phi_W(x,y,z,a,W(a))=0 \tag{6}$$

With (6) we can write $a=A(x,y,z)$ as a function of $x,y,z$. So the general solution derived from (2) can be written as $$\Phi\Big(x,y,z,A(x,y,z),W(A(x,y,z))\Big) \tag{7}$$

We can see that (7) in fact matches our definition of general solution.Now we will prove that (7) is a solution of (1), again $d\Phi/dx$ and $d\Phi/dy$

$$\Phi_x+z_x\Phi_z+ \Phi_A A_x+\Phi_W W'(A) A_x =0 \tag{8}$$ $$\Phi_y+z_y\Phi_z+ \Phi_A A_x+\Phi_W W'(A) A_x =0 \tag{9}$$

Now applying the condition (6) Equations (8), and (9) yield:

$$\Phi_x+z_x\Phi_z =0 \tag{8}$$ $$\Phi_y+z_y\Phi_z =0 \tag{9}$$

Now the systems of equations (2),(4),(5) yield the same derived expression (1) as (7),(8),(9), now $\Phi\Big(x,y,z,A(x,y,z),W(A(x,y,z))\Big)$ is a solution of (1) and we can see that we obtain a different solution for every function $W$.

We can see that this solution is free of the parameters $a$ and $b$, when we choose a particular function $W$ we obtain a particular solution for the PDE.

Landau's generalizes this result in his footnote, however he does it for an easier equation, not a general First-order PDE (1). The steps he does are the same as we did for a general two dimensional First-order PDE.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.