1
$\begingroup$

I need to solve the following equation for $v(x)$: $$\int_0^tv(x)(x+1)dx=f(t)$$ I am given the function $f(t)$. I've done this so far:

If we derive both sides by $t$, we get $v(t)(t+1)=f'(t)$ and $\bar{v}(t)=\frac{f'(t)}{t+1}$. The problem is that I am still off by a constant, i.e., the above only guarantees that : $\int_0^t\bar{v}(x)(x+1)dx+c=f(t)$ which is not enough for me.

  • 0
    **Hint:** consider taking the Fourier or Laplace transform from both sides, solve algebraic equation and making the inverse transform.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @monhawk: how should that help?2012-12-16
  • 0
    If your $f(0)=0$, then $c\equiv0$ for any $\nu(x)$. Isn't it?2012-12-16
  • 0
    @0x2207: yes, the constant is in fact $f(0)$.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @Fabian, from definition $\int_{0}^{0} g(x) dx \equiv 0$2012-12-16
  • 0
    @Fabian: The transform would "eat" the integral and we'll have the multiply of two images: $\mathcal{F}[v(x)]\cdot \mathcal{F}[x+1]$. And $\mathcal{F}[f(t)]$.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @0x2207: he has $f(t)$ given and searches for $v(x)$. The correct statement is, that the equation does not have a solution unless $f(0)=0$.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @m0nhawk: I do not understand how the transform would eat the integral. Could you expand your comment a bit?2012-12-16
  • 0
    @Fabian: This is the [Fredholm equation](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FredholmIntegralEquationoftheFirstKind.html) and the integral represent the convolution with the kernel (kernel and function can be choosed arbitrary in this particular case - no $t$ in under-integral functions). And for every (I don't know a contradiction example) integral transform the convolution of two function transforms into the multiplication of the transforms. See [convolution theorem](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ConvolutionTheorem.html) for details. And the constant would naturally appear after transforms.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @monhawk: [Here](http://planetmath.org/LaplaceTransformOfConvolution.html) is the convolutions theorem for the Laplace transform. I am just not sure how you imagine to choose $f_1$ and $f_2$ such that the integral in the post corresponds to a convolutions for which one can apply this theorem.2012-12-16
  • 0
    @Fabian: I'm also meet so troubles when I start to apply my hint - looks like it was to good to be true.2012-12-16
  • 0
    Thanks for this info. The problem does look like Fredholm equation described. My only problem is that $f(0)\neq 0$, does this mean that there is no $v\in L_2[0,1]$ that satisfy the above?2012-12-16

2 Answers 2

2

It is easy to see that the constant $c$ in your post is in fact $f(0)$. Furthermore, a little thought shows that your equations cannot be solved unless $f(0)=0$ (just plug in $t=0$ in your equation and you find $0=f(0)$).

2

I don't see what is the problem here. Obsviously $f(0)=0$ (for the equation to have a solution) and by deriving as you said, we get $$v(t)=\frac{f^{\prime}(t)}{t+1}$$ If we substitue this back in the orginal equation we have $$f(t)=\int_{0}^{t}f^{\prime}(x)dx=f(t)-f(0)=f(t)$$ which is true

  • 0
    The problem is the given $f(0)\neq 0$.2012-12-16
  • 0
    Then the problem has no solutions2012-12-16