- #1
matematikuvol
- 192
- 0
[tex]y(t) = y0 +
\int^{ t}_{t_0}
f(s, y(s)) ds.[/tex]
Picard’s method starts with the definition of what it means to be a solution: if you guess that a function
φ(t) is a solution, then you can check your guess by substituting it into the right-hand side of equation (2) and
comparing it to the left-hand side, which is simply φ(t) itself. The new idea is that the process of checking
each guess produces a new guess which, even if it is not the correct solution, is a better approximation
than the one you started with. In this way we obtain an iterative solution, with each new approximation
computed from the previous one by the right-hand side of equation (2). This should be reminiscent of
Newton’s method. In fact, the proof that Picard’s method produces a convergent sequence is similar to the
proof for Newton’s method.
How can I be sure that nth solution is better than n-1th solution. Is there some easy way to see this? Is there a case where this is incorrect?
\int^{ t}_{t_0}
f(s, y(s)) ds.[/tex]
Picard’s method starts with the definition of what it means to be a solution: if you guess that a function
φ(t) is a solution, then you can check your guess by substituting it into the right-hand side of equation (2) and
comparing it to the left-hand side, which is simply φ(t) itself. The new idea is that the process of checking
each guess produces a new guess which, even if it is not the correct solution, is a better approximation
than the one you started with. In this way we obtain an iterative solution, with each new approximation
computed from the previous one by the right-hand side of equation (2). This should be reminiscent of
Newton’s method. In fact, the proof that Picard’s method produces a convergent sequence is similar to the
proof for Newton’s method.
How can I be sure that nth solution is better than n-1th solution. Is there some easy way to see this? Is there a case where this is incorrect?