1 00:00:05,060 --> 00:00:06,410 Okay. Good morning, everybody. 2 00:00:07,970 --> 00:00:15,040 We're now starting partial differential equations, which is certainly one of the richest topics that humanity has ever created. 3 00:00:15,060 --> 00:00:18,500 I think you could say we've been talking about Odie now. 4 00:00:18,500 --> 00:00:24,530 PD So. PD Partial differential equation, which means at least two independent variable. 5 00:00:26,690 --> 00:00:32,690 So to begin with, a bit of the history, of course, Newton and Live, MIT and so on invented calculus. 6 00:00:32,690 --> 00:00:39,470 And that was in the second half of the 17th century. And I guess from there, in the ensuing hundred and 50 years or so, 7 00:00:39,860 --> 00:00:45,710 people did more and more with differential equations and then partial differential equations, especially linear ones. 8 00:00:46,070 --> 00:00:51,680 So in the 19th century, you would have had a huge understanding of linear partial differential equations. 9 00:00:52,520 --> 00:00:56,209 And then in the 20th century, non linearity became important. 10 00:00:56,210 --> 00:01:00,440 So now we have this very rich world of linear and nonlinear problems. 11 00:01:00,710 --> 00:01:05,510 Roughly speaking, in the linear case, you can often say more theoretically. 12 00:01:06,080 --> 00:01:09,950 In the nonlinear case you can do amazing things computationally, 13 00:01:10,310 --> 00:01:15,200 and many important things on earth are linear and many other important things are nonlinear. 14 00:01:15,200 --> 00:01:18,530 They're both very important. I brought along a couple of books. 15 00:01:18,980 --> 00:01:21,440 There are of course, hundreds of books on Pdes. 16 00:01:21,800 --> 00:01:27,920 I brought along a couple of my favourites, which from your point of view would be sort of at the mathematics end of things. 17 00:01:27,920 --> 00:01:35,510 These are certainly not science or engineering books. One is by far with a lurid cover introduction to partial differential equations. 18 00:01:36,290 --> 00:01:43,220 And another classic, which keeps getting reissued every decade or so, is Fritz John Partial Differential Equations. 19 00:01:49,620 --> 00:01:56,290 So let's begin with the standard notation that we'll use and that people use all the time, namely subscripts. 20 00:01:56,310 --> 00:02:04,080 When you write you sub t in this world that generally means the partial derivative of you with respect to t. 21 00:02:04,650 --> 00:02:09,560 And if you write you sub x, of course it's the partial with respect to x. 22 00:02:10,140 --> 00:02:20,460 And if you write multiple subscripts, the obvious thing happened like u x x would be the partial squared of you with respect to x squared. 23 00:02:22,440 --> 00:02:28,020 So with notation like that, you can write down PDS compactly in particular. 24 00:02:28,470 --> 00:02:33,690 There's also some vector notation which we know and love the gradient and the Laplace. 25 00:02:34,260 --> 00:02:43,470 So when I write that symbol, I mean the gradient. So the gradient of a scalar function u is a vector in three dimensions. 26 00:02:44,010 --> 00:02:51,280 It would be the vector of the three partial derivatives. You X, you y, you z. 27 00:02:53,290 --> 00:02:56,670 And numerical people generally think of vectors as columns. 28 00:02:56,910 --> 00:03:03,030 So I would tend to think of that as a column vector. And similarly so that's the gradient. 29 00:03:03,900 --> 00:03:12,870 The other big one is the Laplace, in which we write with an upward pointing triangle, and that's a scalar, 30 00:03:13,170 --> 00:03:23,010 namely the sum of the second derivatives in three D that would be u, x, x, plus u, y, y plus u z. 31 00:03:24,300 --> 00:03:35,130 So that's c la plus in. These go back about 200 years to the glory days of French mathematics after Napoleon. 32 00:03:38,910 --> 00:03:44,220 In the handouts there for handouts. You'll notice a couple of pages from the PD coffee table book. 33 00:03:44,820 --> 00:03:49,320 That was a project we did jointly about 15 years ago here at Oxford. 34 00:03:49,470 --> 00:03:55,380 It never got finished, so we finished about 40 pages intending to do about 100. 35 00:03:55,740 --> 00:03:58,980 So it has never been published, but it's freely available online. 36 00:03:59,640 --> 00:04:02,820 If you go to my web page and look under books, you'll find it. 37 00:04:04,110 --> 00:04:11,130 In each case, there's this two page spread describing a PD, and we tried to make it really beautiful and informative. 38 00:04:11,460 --> 00:04:19,200 So although some years have passed, these are still the easiest way to get to know some of the world's interesting PD. 39 00:04:19,590 --> 00:04:21,930 And, well, there are two of them today. 40 00:04:21,930 --> 00:04:28,230 And I will continue to hand out a couple more in each lecture from now on so you can get to know some of our favourite PBDEs. 41 00:04:29,790 --> 00:04:35,640 Let me write down a couple of standards. So. 42 00:04:40,740 --> 00:04:45,690 For example, the LE Plus equation. 43 00:04:49,320 --> 00:04:52,410 Is that the plus in of a function equals zero? 44 00:04:55,030 --> 00:05:01,510 And that makes sense in 3D, but also in 2D. And one day it would be a trivial, odd EU x x equals zero. 45 00:05:01,810 --> 00:05:07,570 People classify PDS into different categories, which I won't really go into very much, 46 00:05:07,570 --> 00:05:13,180 but this one is the classic, the canonical example of an elliptic PD. 47 00:05:14,380 --> 00:05:20,020 The Poisson equation is the same thing, except with a right hand side that may be non-zero. 48 00:05:20,260 --> 00:05:28,360 So that would be LA plus the interview equals F where F would be in general a function of the space variables. 49 00:05:29,080 --> 00:05:40,540 So that's also elliptic. Intuitively, an elliptic equation is one where everything is coupled together instantly. 50 00:05:40,550 --> 00:05:44,030 There's no no notion of time propagation. 51 00:05:46,580 --> 00:05:56,989 The heat equation, also known as the diffusion equation, now does have a time variable. 52 00:05:56,990 --> 00:06:01,280 So that would be u t equals le plus the end of u. 53 00:06:02,570 --> 00:06:05,210 So that now is a time dependent equation. 54 00:06:05,480 --> 00:06:16,820 It's classified, this one as parabolic, which loosely speaking, means a time dependent PDT where information travels infinitely fast. 55 00:06:19,350 --> 00:06:23,310 And then the canonical example of the third category would be the wave equation. 56 00:06:26,320 --> 00:06:31,440 Which is the second order version of this u t t equals le plus ian. 57 00:06:32,110 --> 00:06:36,430 So this is all second derivative duty equals u x x plus u y y plus u. 58 00:06:37,330 --> 00:06:41,410 That's the canonical example of the hyperbolic PD. 59 00:06:44,280 --> 00:06:49,890 And loosely speaking, a hyperbolic equation is one where information travels at a finite speed. 60 00:06:50,280 --> 00:06:54,179 So for this equation, the way I've written it, information travels at speed. 61 00:06:54,180 --> 00:06:59,250 One, just to give a couple examples of a non-linear equation. 62 00:07:01,050 --> 00:07:04,680 There's the equation due to a guy called burgers. 63 00:07:06,240 --> 00:07:18,030 So the burgers equation and that is u t equals u squared sub x plus u x x. 64 00:07:18,660 --> 00:07:22,310 So there you see non linearity. You have a derivative of u squared. 65 00:07:22,320 --> 00:07:26,220 That's the nonlinear term coupled with a linear and diffusive term. 66 00:07:27,810 --> 00:07:33,840 I'm not putting any constants in these equations. Of course, in an application you'd have physical constants all over the place. 67 00:07:35,130 --> 00:07:43,380 Then one other example of a famous nonlinear equation would be the CDV equation that stands for court to Vagaries. 68 00:07:47,510 --> 00:07:57,090 And that's you t equals you squared x plus u x x x. 69 00:07:59,180 --> 00:08:04,610 Little difference is like adding or subtracting an x of course have a huge effect. 70 00:08:05,630 --> 00:08:09,890 When you have a skilled y, you instantly see a term like that is diffusion. 71 00:08:12,380 --> 00:08:16,310 Which means things get smoother and sort of move off to infinity. 72 00:08:16,670 --> 00:08:26,220 A term like this means dispersion. Which means that something like this turns into a wave train. 73 00:08:27,060 --> 00:08:31,740 Very different behaviour. So diffusion is smooth. Dispersion of waves. 74 00:08:36,490 --> 00:08:49,030 Let's look at the handout called examples of. Just to give you a sense of how vast the intellectual terrain here is, how much of science, 75 00:08:49,360 --> 00:08:56,590 especially science but also engineering is related to these things and not just related, but founded on PBDEs. 76 00:08:56,890 --> 00:09:00,910 It's absolutely at the heart of the intellectual world. 77 00:09:01,420 --> 00:09:04,540 So I'll just read them through. So we have a sense of them. 78 00:09:04,540 --> 00:09:10,570 The wave equation I've mentioned, and that would, for example, describe sound waves in air or water. 79 00:09:11,050 --> 00:09:14,470 So the field of acoustics is based on the wave equation. 80 00:09:15,580 --> 00:09:19,150 The heat equation describes diffusion of all sorts of things. 81 00:09:19,360 --> 00:09:25,300 In the case of heat, it's momentum, it's the fusing. But of course other things can diffuse, like salt or whatever you like. 82 00:09:26,830 --> 00:09:30,490 The LE Plus equation is the steady state version of these things. 83 00:09:30,760 --> 00:09:36,400 So often you find that if there's no T in the equation, that's because tea has gone to infinity. 84 00:09:36,730 --> 00:09:42,660 If you have a steady state solution of the heat equation, it's no longer changing in time. 85 00:09:42,670 --> 00:09:49,870 So you have the LE Plus equation. So that's steady state and electromagnetics. 86 00:09:49,870 --> 00:09:55,089 Electrostatic electromagnetics is very much built on that as the the first pillar, 87 00:09:55,090 --> 00:10:01,180 the Laplace equation, the bi harmonic equation is the fourth order analogue of the LE Plus equation. 88 00:10:01,420 --> 00:10:04,960 So the LE Plus equation is second order by harmonic. 89 00:10:06,070 --> 00:10:09,430 Harmonic as LE Plus by harmonic is sort of harmonic squared. 90 00:10:09,430 --> 00:10:14,530 That's a fourth order linear PD and that's the basis of solid mechanics. 91 00:10:14,530 --> 00:10:20,560 Elastic waves are by harmonic, whereas acoustic waves are harmonic. 92 00:10:20,860 --> 00:10:24,040 So acoustic is second order. Elastic is fourth order. 93 00:10:24,460 --> 00:10:32,380 Turns out it's the same equation for this gives fluids in the limit of zero reynolds number where a viscosity completely dominates momentum. 94 00:10:34,020 --> 00:10:38,760 The Poisson equation is a steady state. Potentials, as I say here, when you have sources. 95 00:10:39,000 --> 00:10:45,150 So if you have an electrostatic field, for example, with some charge distributed around, then you'd have the LE Plus equation. 96 00:10:47,790 --> 00:10:53,190 Plus on the question. Sorry, I guess I already mentioned the elastic wave equation. 97 00:10:53,700 --> 00:11:01,080 The bi harmonic is a scalar version. Elastic waves actually involve two coupled fields. 98 00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:07,660 So you have sound waves and solids actually involve pressure waves going this way and shear waves going that way. 99 00:11:07,680 --> 00:11:16,380 So it's a coupled system of equations. The Helmholtz equation is what you get if you do acoustics, but you fix the frequency. 100 00:11:16,590 --> 00:11:22,890 So if you look at the response of a system to an input at a given frequency, that becomes the Helmholtz equation. 101 00:11:23,070 --> 00:11:28,490 Another Elliptic PD. Maxwell's equations. 102 00:11:28,490 --> 00:11:40,210 Well, they're pretty famous. They were, I think, the first great example of a scientific advance that was really necessarily cast in the light of PBS. 103 00:11:40,970 --> 00:11:46,180 This came long after Pdes existed. 50 years after Laplace, ampersand and all that stuff. 104 00:11:46,190 --> 00:11:51,140 But when Maxwell did his work, you might know a bit of this history. 105 00:11:51,560 --> 00:11:57,140 Initially, for a decade or so, he was working with fairly physical models of how electric, 106 00:11:57,500 --> 00:12:03,020 how Faraday's discoveries might work, how electric fields and magnetic fields might interconnect. 107 00:12:03,500 --> 00:12:09,050 But as time went by, he realised that the right way to do this was as a partial differential equation. 108 00:12:09,260 --> 00:12:17,420 And his great paper, which created electromagnetic wave theory, wrote down the pdes that we call Maxwell's equations. 109 00:12:19,510 --> 00:12:22,749 So that's linear. It's epical in impact, but linear. 110 00:12:22,750 --> 00:12:31,420 And then Einstein's equations are very, very nonlinear. This is a coupled system of about ten nonlinear equations at the heart of general relativity. 111 00:12:31,900 --> 00:12:36,459 If you look at a typical applied mathematician like me, I more or less know Maxwell's equations, 112 00:12:36,460 --> 00:12:41,590 and I certainly don't really know Einstein's equations. Is there anyone in the room who works with Einstein's equations? 113 00:12:42,880 --> 00:12:53,530 Okay. One of the great discoveries of all time. Schrodinger's equation is the basis of quantum mechanics and chemistry, if you like. 114 00:12:55,040 --> 00:13:00,410 I personally think that Schrodinger's equation was the most important scientific advance of the 20th century. 115 00:13:00,620 --> 00:13:09,120 With the date DNA, Watson and Crick would come in as number two because once we had this equation in principle, the whole periodic table is explained. 116 00:13:09,140 --> 00:13:12,380 Chemistry suddenly has a mathematical basis. 117 00:13:12,590 --> 00:13:15,560 It's amazing the impact of Schrodinger's equation. 118 00:13:17,480 --> 00:13:23,660 The court of negative freeze equation I mentioned here the characteristic solutions of those are solid times. 119 00:13:23,660 --> 00:13:30,080 These are nonlinear waves which travel at a speed that depends on their amplitude and interact in interesting ways. 120 00:13:30,890 --> 00:13:34,070 The the equation dates to the early 20th century, 121 00:13:34,070 --> 00:13:42,020 but it was in the 1970s that people discovered solid lines and that really for a decade became the centrepiece of applied mathematics. 122 00:13:43,370 --> 00:13:49,460 The Klein Gordon equation is something that comes up in quantum mechanics attempts to relate that to relativity. 123 00:13:50,360 --> 00:13:53,900 Berger's equation I mentioned is at the heart of the theory of shockwaves. 124 00:13:54,830 --> 00:14:01,220 If you don't have this term there at all, then you get pure shock waves with with absolute discontinuity. 125 00:14:01,520 --> 00:14:05,390 If you have a little viscosity in there, you get smoothed off shock waves. 126 00:14:05,600 --> 00:14:11,759 So typically there'd be a small epsilon multiplying this term in a Berger's equation as another. 127 00:14:11,760 --> 00:14:15,229 Your Stokes equations are the basis of all the fluid mechanics. 128 00:14:15,230 --> 00:14:23,360 So you take any Newtonian fluid, the navier-stokes equations which date to 1846 or so describe how it evolves. 129 00:14:23,360 --> 00:14:28,040 And really, for the last hundred and 70 years we've been trying to solve them in various configurations. 130 00:14:29,840 --> 00:14:36,200 The Euler equations are the same thing, but without viscosity, so they're a special case of the Navier-stokes equations. 131 00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:45,770 When viscosity doesn't matter, the fisher CP equation, which we'll get to at the end of today, is a simple travelling wave equation. 132 00:14:46,010 --> 00:14:49,280 So it describes the sort of thing like pulses in neurones. 133 00:14:49,280 --> 00:14:53,060 It actually doesn't do precisely that, but it's that kind of flavour. 134 00:14:53,540 --> 00:15:01,130 The next one, the Hodgkin Huxley equation, is precisely more complicated system of equations designed to model neurones. 135 00:15:02,450 --> 00:15:08,750 The black holes equation is something that came up a few decades ago for valuation of options in finance. 136 00:15:09,200 --> 00:15:14,750 I remember when I first heard about it, it seemed like a silly gimmick, but now it's infinitely important. 137 00:15:17,650 --> 00:15:23,080 So virtually all of what I've mentioned is science. But then there are also equations that come up in engineering. 138 00:15:23,290 --> 00:15:27,130 In other words, equations that people design in order to achieve something. 139 00:15:27,370 --> 00:15:30,850 And certainly the paranormal like equation is in that category. 140 00:15:31,060 --> 00:15:39,520 It's a nonlinear diffusion equation designed so that instead of smoothing away edges actually sharpen up in an interesting fashion. 141 00:15:40,180 --> 00:15:45,490 And that is one of the early ones in a whole industry of using PDA used to do image processing. 142 00:15:46,900 --> 00:15:54,520 The Koshy Riemann equations are an elliptic pair of equations which are at the heart of complex analysis of the Allen Khan equation, 143 00:15:54,520 --> 00:15:59,650 which will play with a bit related to formation of structure in alloys and other materials. 144 00:16:00,070 --> 00:16:04,770 The key promoter efficiency equation is a beautiful example of a chaotic problem. 145 00:16:04,780 --> 00:16:07,930 So it's a PDA whose solutions are chaotic. 146 00:16:08,500 --> 00:16:11,680 They look chaotic on the screen, and they can be proved to be chaotic. 147 00:16:11,890 --> 00:16:15,820 And it has some connection with problems of flames and turbulence. 148 00:16:17,740 --> 00:16:24,760 So here's the trivia question for you Which three equations on this list won a Nobel Prize? 149 00:16:28,850 --> 00:16:33,489 Anyone have a category candidate? Black Show. 150 00:16:33,490 --> 00:16:37,060 Yes, Black. Charles Equation 1997 Economics. 151 00:16:37,270 --> 00:16:44,690 Nobel Prize. MAXWELL No, because it was too early. 152 00:16:44,700 --> 00:16:48,300 It certainly deserved a Nobel Prize, but it was already there when Nobel got going. 153 00:16:51,410 --> 00:16:56,180 Schrodinger. Yes. So Schrodinger in 1933 won a Nobel Prize. 154 00:16:56,480 --> 00:17:08,059 And the last. Another one that should have surely was Einstein's equations. 155 00:17:08,060 --> 00:17:13,219 But Einstein famously, by best estimates, are that he deserved four Nobel Prizes. 156 00:17:13,220 --> 00:17:16,280 He got one, and it wasn't for the Einstein equations. 157 00:17:18,740 --> 00:17:22,580 So the other one is the Hodgkin Huxley equations for neural conduction. 158 00:17:22,820 --> 00:17:26,780 And so that was the 1963 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. 159 00:17:27,170 --> 00:17:33,649 So it's a wonderfully diverse here we have one in physics, Schrodinger, one in medicine, Hodgkin Huxley and one in economics. 160 00:17:33,650 --> 00:17:43,550 And Black-Scholes. Interestingly, mathematicians take the view that, you know, linear problems are easy, nonlinear problems are significant. 161 00:17:43,760 --> 00:17:46,850 There's even the expression linearity breeds contempt. 162 00:17:48,140 --> 00:17:52,740 Nevertheless, if you look at the three that won Nobel Prizes, two of them are linear. 163 00:17:52,760 --> 00:17:56,690 So Schrodinger is linear and Black-Scholes is linear. 164 00:17:57,050 --> 00:18:00,080 It's only the Hodgkin Huxley equations which are nonlinear. 165 00:18:02,110 --> 00:18:02,440 Okay. 166 00:18:06,070 --> 00:18:14,170 I have another trivia that we won't go into here, but I believe that at least a third of physics Nobel Prizes have been won by eigenvalue problems. 167 00:18:17,370 --> 00:18:26,980 So let's just glance for a moment at the PDT coffee table book on feet, just to give you a sense of that. 168 00:18:28,840 --> 00:18:36,880 So the heat equation is the diffusion equation, and as the picture illustrates, it describes how edges turn into smooth things. 169 00:18:37,570 --> 00:18:44,980 I hope you'll, in your own time read this. We try to write these things very carefully to say things that are interesting and important. 170 00:18:45,970 --> 00:18:49,900 For example, there's the interesting mathematical fact that the solution is not unique. 171 00:18:50,290 --> 00:18:53,680 It only becomes unique if you force it to be zero at infinity. 172 00:18:55,010 --> 00:19:02,000 But then, more importantly physically is the wonderful, exciting connection between diffusion and probability. 173 00:19:02,540 --> 00:19:09,020 Everything in our world that diffuses almost has some randomness as the underlying mechanism. 174 00:19:09,350 --> 00:19:14,960 And because I like to demonstrate things on the computer, I'd like to play with that a bit. 175 00:19:17,790 --> 00:19:27,020 I guess I'll write down a few things first, but then we're going to play with random effects that underline the underlie the heat equation. 176 00:19:28,400 --> 00:19:39,800 But let's first treat it as a PD. So what I'll call Section 5.2 is our first numerical approach to solving PD e's by explicit. 177 00:19:42,440 --> 00:19:56,430 Finite difference in one dimension. So when you see that phrase, you know that I'm talking about parties that have two independent variables, 178 00:19:56,850 --> 00:20:00,390 namely one space variable and one time variable. 179 00:20:01,650 --> 00:20:05,879 So the heat equation is the simplest such equation. Let's consider that one. 180 00:20:05,880 --> 00:20:09,300 Suppose we have you t equals you. 181 00:20:09,300 --> 00:20:20,030 X x the one d heat equation. And suppose we want to solve that numerically on the computer? 182 00:20:20,720 --> 00:20:25,750 Well, the obvious thing to do is make a grid with space steps and time steps. 183 00:20:25,750 --> 00:20:31,550 So let's do that. We'll have our grid of points in space. 184 00:20:32,300 --> 00:20:37,010 And here we are at time zero. And then at the next time looks like this. 185 00:20:37,940 --> 00:20:42,710 In the simplest case, we just have a regular grid in both space and time. 186 00:20:44,090 --> 00:20:50,990 And the notation we often use is that K is often the timestamp. 187 00:20:51,590 --> 00:20:56,900 So Delta T and H is often the space that. 188 00:21:00,080 --> 00:21:04,879 So you can imagine this criticising the problem by approximating this space 189 00:21:04,880 --> 00:21:09,890 derivatives by some finite difference in this direction and time in that direction. 190 00:21:10,310 --> 00:21:15,730 Many ways to do this. For example. So the simplest formula. 191 00:21:18,660 --> 00:21:23,640 I'll begin without even writing down the formula. I'll write down what's called the stencil for the formula. 192 00:21:23,880 --> 00:21:32,130 So if you show the points that a formula connects in a diagram like this, that's called the stencil. 193 00:21:34,240 --> 00:21:39,280 And what that picture means is I'm about to tell you an algebraic equation. 194 00:21:39,580 --> 00:21:44,080 To get an estimate of this value, given estimates of these values, 195 00:21:45,340 --> 00:21:51,850 the notation will use is I'll call this the end plus one j and that's this point here. 196 00:21:52,330 --> 00:22:01,090 This point is then the end. J This would be V and Jerry plus one and V and Jane minus one. 197 00:22:01,330 --> 00:22:08,150 So the subscript is telling you the x index and the superscript is telling you the time index. 198 00:22:10,010 --> 00:22:14,720 So the simple formula you could use to model the heat equation would couple these four points. 199 00:22:14,930 --> 00:22:21,050 And what we need to do is approximate the space derivative with these three and the time derivative with those two. 200 00:22:21,500 --> 00:22:30,950 So it's pretty obvious how we should do that. We should say the end plus one minus the N divided by the time step. 201 00:22:33,270 --> 00:22:40,380 Is equal to the j plus one minus to the J plus v j minus one. 202 00:22:43,750 --> 00:22:47,290 Divided by the square of the space step. 203 00:22:47,950 --> 00:22:53,480 So there you have the simplest possible finite difference formula for a p. 204 00:22:55,930 --> 00:22:59,410 There are many things you can say about that formula. We're going to run it in a minute. 205 00:22:59,980 --> 00:23:06,010 One thing you can say about it is that we could interpret it as a matrix of matrix multiplication. 206 00:23:06,280 --> 00:23:09,430 So suppose I think of V. 207 00:23:10,330 --> 00:23:16,050 As a vector. Of samples at different places in space. 208 00:23:16,560 --> 00:23:19,710 So I could think of it as v one. V to. 209 00:23:21,690 --> 00:23:24,960 Me capital, then I guess I'll call it. 210 00:23:27,500 --> 00:23:36,889 So suppose I have capital n grid points in space, then the whole state at a given time is given by this vector of linked capital. 211 00:23:36,890 --> 00:23:41,870 N and I could write this as a matrix problem. 212 00:23:42,200 --> 00:23:52,850 So that stencil, that formula tells you this new value in terms of the other values at the previous time step. 213 00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:55,610 So I could write it in this form. 214 00:23:55,610 --> 00:24:05,390 I could say the vector of values at the new time step is equal to sum matrix times the vector values at the old times. 215 00:24:07,530 --> 00:24:10,950 And that matrix has coefficients that come from this formula. 216 00:24:11,340 --> 00:24:22,370 And in fact, it's a tri diagonal matrix. And it contains a constant on the diagonal and another constant on the first super diagonal. 217 00:24:23,090 --> 00:24:26,510 And that same other constant on the first sub diagonal. 218 00:24:29,980 --> 00:24:36,160 And A is equal to. One minus two. 219 00:24:37,610 --> 00:24:43,720 K over H Square. B is equal to Kovrig Square. 220 00:24:52,280 --> 00:25:01,880 So. Very generally, whenever you deal with finite difference approximations, at least linear ones, they can be formulated as matrix problems. 221 00:25:02,390 --> 00:25:05,690 In this case, it's simply multiplying a vector by a matrix. 222 00:25:05,690 --> 00:25:08,000 So you don't have to think of that as a matrix problem. 223 00:25:08,240 --> 00:25:13,550 But in other cases, we'll be solving a system of equations if you want to do this on a computer. 224 00:25:13,730 --> 00:25:19,280 Of course, if A is big, you'd be crazy to make this giant matrix as a matrix, 225 00:25:19,730 --> 00:25:24,110 but you could use a sparse representation and just contain the numbers that matter. 226 00:25:27,240 --> 00:25:38,310 The last thing to say about the way I formulated it here. I didn't talk about boundary conditions, but of course that's a big issue involving Pdes. 227 00:25:38,580 --> 00:25:46,860 The simplest version of all of this would go as follows Imagine that I have an interval on which I want to solve the problem, 228 00:25:46,860 --> 00:25:51,180 and suppose my boundary condition is that you is zero at both ends. 229 00:25:53,460 --> 00:25:59,340 Then the natural thing to do would be to regard my unknowns as in the interior of that interval. 230 00:26:00,090 --> 00:26:04,470 So this would be the one and this would be the end. 231 00:26:08,400 --> 00:26:13,840 Of course, other boundary conditions would be treated in other ways, but for this case of zero boundary conditions. 232 00:26:14,370 --> 00:26:16,469 What I've written down is exactly everything. 233 00:26:16,470 --> 00:26:26,820 The boundary conditions are already there in the way I've written it, sort of from the fact that you'll notice the matrix of course, 234 00:26:26,820 --> 00:26:33,300 doesn't contain a term there or there, but since that term is going to multiply zero anyway, it doesn't matter. 235 00:26:33,570 --> 00:26:39,180 So this simple matrix form has implicitly imposed a couple of boundary conditions. 236 00:26:41,750 --> 00:26:46,880 Let's run that thing. And this is the code called M35. 237 00:26:48,440 --> 00:26:55,160 So if you look at M 35 heat, you'll see what it does is exactly this. 238 00:26:55,940 --> 00:27:01,280 It uses a sparse matrix. So it actually does do it as matrix times vector just for fun. 239 00:27:01,790 --> 00:27:10,790 And the matrix is spire so that that's not so inefficient. It actually constructs the main diagonal and then the off diagonal of the sparse matrix. 240 00:27:11,030 --> 00:27:14,510 You can see the commands A times sparse and B time sparse. 241 00:27:17,730 --> 00:27:27,360 There's the basic version of this code actually should have a percent sign a comment before the line that says comment is in for periodic B.S. 242 00:27:27,360 --> 00:27:34,830 So the first version I'm going to show you is zero boundary conditions, as if that line had a percent sign in front of it. 243 00:27:41,430 --> 00:27:48,310 So if I type 35 heat. You can see it flow. 244 00:27:49,900 --> 00:27:54,910 A general principle of the heat equation is that it's exciting for a few milliseconds and then it grows boring. 245 00:27:57,620 --> 00:28:01,730 Notice the boundary conditions are visible. You can see that it's zero at the end. 246 00:28:01,970 --> 00:28:06,590 There's no unknown at the end. So the first point you see is the first in from the edge. 247 00:28:07,850 --> 00:28:14,510 So there's the heat equation. Let's just run it once more. There you are. 248 00:28:15,080 --> 00:28:21,830 It started with a non smooth initial condition, but infinitesimal amount of time is enough to make that smooth. 249 00:28:24,820 --> 00:28:33,070 Notice that the space step I've used is 1/40, so a modest number of grid points and the time step I've used. 250 00:28:33,520 --> 00:28:37,750 You can see the second line of code is 0.4 times x squared. 251 00:28:38,170 --> 00:28:41,650 So I've taken a pretty small time step of 0.4 times x squared. 252 00:28:43,360 --> 00:28:46,659 Let's run it again. But pause at each step. 253 00:28:46,660 --> 00:28:50,500 So I have a variation called AM 35 pause. 254 00:28:51,190 --> 00:28:55,960 And you can see I achieve that by commenting in the pause command. 255 00:28:56,770 --> 00:29:03,820 So this is the initial condition. And then after one timestamp it looks like that mathematically this is now a smooth function. 256 00:29:04,030 --> 00:29:11,410 Of course, computationally it still lives on a grid. And then very quickly you can see the shape changing. 257 00:29:12,610 --> 00:29:15,790 It looks exactly flat in the top middle. 258 00:29:15,790 --> 00:29:20,890 Mathematically, it's not exactly flat, but it's, if you like, exponentially close to being flat. 259 00:29:21,850 --> 00:29:26,260 And then quickly you get. That behaviour. 260 00:29:29,820 --> 00:29:35,670 Then there are two other things to modify with the comments. Suppose you wanted periodic boundary conditions. 261 00:29:35,940 --> 00:29:40,920 So the value at this end, rather than being forced to be zero, is set equal to the value at this end. 262 00:29:42,120 --> 00:29:45,359 Well, you can achieve that by making the matrix wrap around you. 263 00:29:45,360 --> 00:29:52,080 Make it into a circular matrix in effect. There's a line of code that shows you that the one that breaks into the margin a little bit. 264 00:29:52,680 --> 00:30:00,780 If I run that version, I get M 35 PR, so it looks the same and so far it is almost the same. 265 00:30:00,780 --> 00:30:08,070 But now you can see at the boundary it's going up because now there's no heat being lost at the end. 266 00:30:08,370 --> 00:30:13,680 The heat is just averaging out. So that's the one of the physical interpretations here. 267 00:30:13,890 --> 00:30:19,860 We start with an uneven heat distribution. As time goes to infinity, it becomes a constant heat. 268 00:30:20,520 --> 00:30:24,420 But the total amount of heat doesn't change with periodic boundary conditions. 269 00:30:25,710 --> 00:30:31,860 Whereas for the initial one. With zero boundary conditions. 270 00:30:31,860 --> 00:30:37,559 Again, it's the heat flow, but now the ends of the bar, if you like, are being held at temperature zero. 271 00:30:37,560 --> 00:30:41,610 So he has flowing out and the destiny is zero temperature. 272 00:30:46,940 --> 00:30:50,990 The last modification in this code to make is the one that. 273 00:30:52,900 --> 00:30:59,080 Determines the size of the time step. So if you see in that second line of code, it's K equals 0.4 X squared. 274 00:30:59,320 --> 00:31:03,430 And then the comment says, try changing point four, 2.5. 275 00:31:03,430 --> 00:31:08,230 1.5 is the critical value at which the thing goes unstable. 276 00:31:08,530 --> 00:31:14,410 So now let's change it. 2.51. So that's called n 35 u for unstable. 277 00:31:17,700 --> 00:31:20,820 And you see this beautiful growth of instability. 278 00:31:21,960 --> 00:31:26,400 Normally it doesn't look like that. That's what it looks like if you're right at the edge of instability. 279 00:31:26,790 --> 00:31:32,820 Of course, normally you would have picked point seven or 3.2 and then you'd have explosion much faster. 280 00:31:35,740 --> 00:31:39,970 So obviously there are issues to discuss concerning stability of these disparate transactions. 281 00:31:42,070 --> 00:31:49,570 Now let's play with the other two codes on the page, which are the physical underpinnings of diffusion. 282 00:31:50,200 --> 00:31:55,590 This is really one of the exciting stories of the last 150 years, if you like. 283 00:31:57,190 --> 00:32:03,280 The the one minute version of the history is that you had these classical laws of continuum mechanics, 284 00:32:03,280 --> 00:32:10,570 some of them invented here in Oxford, you know, Boyle's Law and so on, which in the 19th century people realised had a statistical basis. 285 00:32:10,840 --> 00:32:13,899 So the two big names were Maxwell and Boltzmann, 286 00:32:13,900 --> 00:32:22,990 who realised that it was random bouncing around of particles that were the basis of Boyle's law and other laws of continuum mechanics. 287 00:32:23,920 --> 00:32:28,720 That was all a little bit abstract still in the 19th century, and then it became more concrete. 288 00:32:29,530 --> 00:32:37,150 And famously with Einstein, another one of the Nobel Prizes, he didn't win once for his paper on Brownian motion in 1905, 289 00:32:37,360 --> 00:32:45,040 when he really studied the details of how random effects could be visible on a macroscopic scale. 290 00:32:45,430 --> 00:32:49,989 So he explained the motion of little particles in a fluid as the result of a lot 291 00:32:49,990 --> 00:32:54,460 of impacts from even smaller particles in a fluid that were effectively random. 292 00:32:54,940 --> 00:33:00,760 And then mathematically that became the basis of a greatly growing area of mathematics. 293 00:33:00,970 --> 00:33:06,610 Norbert Wiener was a famous name who turned that idea of Brownian motion into a very precise 294 00:33:06,610 --> 00:33:12,790 mathematical concept of a continuous curve that's nowhere smooth with a dimension of a half, 295 00:33:12,790 --> 00:33:15,880 and all sorts of neat things going on, or one and a half, depending what you measure. 296 00:33:17,200 --> 00:33:25,239 And in fact, in my career, among the two or three biggest developments in mathematics over the years that I've 297 00:33:25,240 --> 00:33:29,410 been doing this is the growth of everything to do with probability and stochastic. 298 00:33:29,440 --> 00:33:38,500 It's just amazing. So maybe 30 years ago you might have said the centrepiece of somewhat applied mathematics would be pdes. 299 00:33:38,770 --> 00:33:46,060 Now many people would say it's probability. Personally, I still like beauty, and I think probability is a fad, but a very important fact. 300 00:33:46,690 --> 00:33:51,190 So the word stochastic just gets more and more important in mathematics. 301 00:33:52,600 --> 00:33:59,550 So let's go back to 1905. If Einstein had had MATLAB, this is what he would have done. 302 00:33:59,560 --> 00:34:03,610 He would have run this code called M 36 Brownian. 303 00:34:05,530 --> 00:34:13,570 And what it does is show you some Brownian motion. Now, Brownian motion as as the phrase is used by mathematicians, 304 00:34:13,810 --> 00:34:18,910 describes a mathematical limit where things are really happening on infinitely small timescales. 305 00:34:19,150 --> 00:34:22,000 So a Brownian path is a continuous path. 306 00:34:22,780 --> 00:34:29,769 Of course, one simulates that by discrete things, and if you take a random walk, then that looks like a Brownian path. 307 00:34:29,770 --> 00:34:35,380 And in a limit of more and more smaller and smaller steps, it can be proved it has the same behaviour. 308 00:34:35,680 --> 00:34:40,960 So this code is taking random walks of a thousand particles. 309 00:34:42,280 --> 00:34:45,640 So if I say M 36 Brownian. 310 00:34:49,210 --> 00:34:55,310 You say a thousand particles start in the middle and then they're just moving independently. 311 00:34:55,310 --> 00:35:00,310 Each one is moving around the block, but on a small enough scale that it's essentially Brownian motion. 312 00:35:03,660 --> 00:35:06,780 The usual principle. At first it's interesting, and then it becomes boring. 313 00:35:06,780 --> 00:35:15,740 So let's start it again. Pay attention. All sorts of things spring from this bit of physics. 314 00:35:15,770 --> 00:35:21,200 This randomness is the source of the square root of t effect that you get in diffusion problems. 315 00:35:21,200 --> 00:35:23,689 So what what's the radius of this blob? 316 00:35:23,690 --> 00:35:30,860 Well, it scales like the square root of t all the square roots that appear and statistics are related to this picture. 317 00:35:31,130 --> 00:35:37,010 It gets this universal square root effect that shows up in all kinds of ways and. 318 00:35:38,180 --> 00:35:45,020 The more you study this stuff, the more addictive it becomes. You ask yourself, how big is how far out should the biggest one be? 319 00:35:45,230 --> 00:35:50,000 That would be a question of extreme value statistics. And of course, all sorts of things are known. 320 00:35:50,210 --> 00:35:53,750 What's the density function as a function of time? Well, that's easy. 321 00:35:53,750 --> 00:35:57,110 That's a normal distribution and so on and so on. 322 00:35:57,500 --> 00:36:01,100 In the limit of infinitely many particles, infinitely small time steps, 323 00:36:01,640 --> 00:36:07,850 you get normal distributions and those arise in solving the heat equation and other diffusion equations. 324 00:36:09,840 --> 00:36:14,940 You may notice the square effect, but that, of course, is due to the finite use of my screen. 325 00:36:15,540 --> 00:36:23,900 The particles are not really confined to a square. There's another code that's even more addictive. 326 00:36:25,760 --> 00:36:28,980 So if we had a spare hour, I would spend it all running the next code. 327 00:36:29,000 --> 00:36:32,630 Let's run a little bit. This is called M 37 Rectangle. 328 00:36:34,100 --> 00:36:37,160 Now, if I do in 37 rectangle. 329 00:36:41,210 --> 00:36:46,850 Rectangle can. It ask me how many fleas do I want to put in a box of length? 330 00:36:46,850 --> 00:36:50,120 Ten and with one. So let's begin with one flea. 331 00:36:51,860 --> 00:36:58,310 So there's the flea. And when I press return, it wanders around. 332 00:36:59,370 --> 00:37:02,700 And I don't know what's going on there, sir, until it hits the boundary. 333 00:37:03,820 --> 00:37:07,000 So you can't resist wondering how long will that take? 334 00:37:07,030 --> 00:37:11,050 Sorry about the weird graphics effects. See if I can prove that. 335 00:37:13,850 --> 00:37:19,770 Let's give it more fleas. Oh, dear. 336 00:37:25,100 --> 00:37:33,850 Let's try again, please. So each one keeps going until it hits the boundary and then it stops. 337 00:37:34,360 --> 00:37:41,940 So of course, you can ask questions like. After a certain amount of time, how many do you expect to still be alive? 338 00:37:42,750 --> 00:37:59,760 Let's take more fleas. But actually the way this problem arose for me was an interest in the question 339 00:37:59,760 --> 00:38:06,030 of what's the probability of a flea reaching the end rather than a side? 340 00:38:06,970 --> 00:38:13,690 So of course it might happen by chance that one of the fleas gets all the way to the end before hitting the side. 341 00:38:14,020 --> 00:38:19,630 And you can see that that's going to be hard work. Let's take a thousand. 342 00:38:25,510 --> 00:38:33,990 And in fact, this was one of the problems in the. Siam 100 to the challenge that I showed you. 343 00:38:34,380 --> 00:38:41,820 I think the last problem was to determine the probability that this particle ends up at an end rather than at a side. 344 00:38:42,030 --> 00:38:49,920 And the answer is something like ten to the minus six. And in fact, that probability can be determined exactly analytically for what it's worth. 345 00:38:50,820 --> 00:39:00,090 You can use a conformal map of the rectangle onto a circle in order to find what would be called the harmonic measure of the end of the region. 346 00:39:00,540 --> 00:39:03,960 Let's do it one more time and then we'll stop that. 347 00:39:05,760 --> 00:39:13,710 With 10,000. Now, of course, in the world of gases, you have ten to the 23 fleas. 348 00:39:14,340 --> 00:39:18,570 So, you know, a jar of gas would have roughly Avogadro's number of fleas in it. 349 00:39:21,140 --> 00:39:26,640 Sorry about that. I have no idea. 350 00:39:28,330 --> 00:39:33,970 Those of us on the campaign team have found that this year, the last 12 months, MATLAB seems to have gotten worse. 351 00:39:35,890 --> 00:39:40,660 We hope this is a transient effect, but all sorts of weird things have been happening to us graphically, 352 00:39:40,960 --> 00:39:49,270 and we're referring specifically to the graphics. We don't know how to fix them, but when new versions come out, things tend to be fixed. 353 00:39:49,270 --> 00:39:54,940 So hopefully. Hopefully it will solve itself. 354 00:39:56,430 --> 00:39:59,620 Okay. Let's kill that. Okay. 355 00:39:59,770 --> 00:40:05,560 So you can see that probability, random walks, random effects are at the heart of important PD. 356 00:40:06,250 --> 00:40:14,200 And to put that backwards, the pdes exist in order to model in a scientifically compact way, ultimately the effects of randomness. 357 00:40:14,380 --> 00:40:19,600 But there are so many random particles in the physical world that although that may be the mechanism, 358 00:40:20,140 --> 00:40:25,510 still the right way to do it is the continuous model for many purposes, of course, never for all purposes. 359 00:40:26,830 --> 00:40:35,350 Now along those lines, I wanted to just make a remark or two about discrete versus continuous models. 360 00:40:43,250 --> 00:40:47,180 So if you ask, you know, what's the truth? Is the truth discrete or continuous? 361 00:40:47,660 --> 00:40:54,320 The more you think about that, the more you find that there are just too many things going on to give the single answer to that question. 362 00:40:54,330 --> 00:41:01,460 And let me illustrate that by mentioning some things that are discrete and their analogues that are continuous. 363 00:41:06,430 --> 00:41:10,510 So for example, molecules bouncing around are discrete, right? 364 00:41:12,090 --> 00:41:18,180 And in some sense that's the truth of what's happening with continuum mechanics. 365 00:41:19,170 --> 00:41:23,220 And then the continuous models that we use are of course continuous. 366 00:41:23,550 --> 00:41:29,700 So continuum mechanics or the continuum models used in physics. 367 00:41:31,080 --> 00:41:37,320 Our continuous and boil and hooked didn't know about all these molecules bouncing around. 368 00:41:37,560 --> 00:41:42,270 All they knew was that they could measure the pressure of air and it would satisfy an equation. 369 00:41:43,980 --> 00:41:47,790 Something else this discrete would be a finite difference. 370 00:41:47,790 --> 00:41:54,530 Approximation. And that's a discrete approximation to a PD. 371 00:41:57,640 --> 00:42:02,620 So in some sense that's the truth. But this is the mechanism we use for studying that truth. 372 00:42:04,590 --> 00:42:06,870 Something discrete would be a random walk. 373 00:42:08,480 --> 00:42:16,070 And when we say random walk, we we typically mean things like take a point and then go north, south, east or west with probability one. 374 00:42:17,520 --> 00:42:26,520 And so you might follow a trajectory like this. So a random walk has some discrete time and space, maybe. 375 00:42:27,420 --> 00:42:37,230 Or maybe just one or the other is discrete, but that's a approximation to a continuous object that mathematicians call Brownian motion. 376 00:42:39,080 --> 00:42:43,790 But of course, Brownian motion to a mathematician, that's nothing continuous to a physicist. 377 00:42:43,800 --> 00:42:46,850 Well, maybe that's something in the realm of bouncing molecules again. 378 00:42:46,860 --> 00:42:52,730 So I really mean here. Brownian motion for mathematicians. 379 00:42:55,510 --> 00:42:58,680 Another example since we've been showing pictures on the screen. 380 00:42:58,690 --> 00:43:06,290 What about the dots on a computer screen? They are discrete at various levels. 381 00:43:06,300 --> 00:43:09,990 They look discrete to you and they realise by pixels which are also discreet. 382 00:43:10,320 --> 00:43:15,600 But then somehow we end up with perceiving things that are continuous. 383 00:43:18,820 --> 00:43:21,040 So there are all sorts of complexities there. 384 00:43:21,520 --> 00:43:29,220 Of course, your brain has its discrete rods and cones, business and discrete neurones, but somehow we end up perceiving it as a continuum. 385 00:43:29,230 --> 00:43:37,300 You can see things are very mixed together. Let me just mention one more, which is floating point arithmetic. 386 00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:42,660 Which the computer is using when I do all of these experiments. 387 00:43:42,990 --> 00:43:46,380 But that's an approximation to real arithmetic. 388 00:43:54,450 --> 00:44:02,940 And the list could go on. And what strikes me about a list like this is that the different rows really have nothing to do with one another. 389 00:44:03,210 --> 00:44:07,380 The fact that this is discrete and that continuous completely unrelated to 390 00:44:07,430 --> 00:44:11,520 this discrete versus that continuous and this discrete versus that continuous, 391 00:44:11,700 --> 00:44:16,230 they're just all different. Things like this come up all the time in many different ways. 392 00:44:16,830 --> 00:44:19,470 Another handout is an essay I wrote on this. 393 00:44:19,770 --> 00:44:27,720 So the one with a pretty picture of Hurricane Katrina is an essay I wrote on discrete and continuous things. 394 00:44:33,700 --> 00:44:39,490 Okay. I want to spend the last few minutes talking about something non-linear. 395 00:44:39,520 --> 00:44:43,420 Our first example of a nonlinear PD, the Fisher CP equation. 396 00:44:56,770 --> 00:45:03,820 Fourier was way back in 1807 or something, and he's the guy who did the heat equation, which is linear, 397 00:45:04,240 --> 00:45:09,219 or at least he is a key person in that mostly the 19th century was about linear problems, 398 00:45:09,220 --> 00:45:15,010 but a big counterexample is navier-stokes, which is a nonlinear equation, and that's deep into the 19th century. 399 00:45:15,940 --> 00:45:20,080 In the 20th century, all sorts of good things happen in nonlinear problems. 400 00:45:20,500 --> 00:45:28,930 So the Fisher CP equation is an equation that was independently studied by Fisher, 401 00:45:28,930 --> 00:45:33,790 the great statistician in England, and then KP MP three Russian mathematicians. 402 00:45:36,040 --> 00:45:39,159 So what? I even forget their names. What is it? That's cool. 403 00:45:39,160 --> 00:45:44,620 McGrath, Piotrowski and his schooner. That's right. And Komarov is one of the greats of all time. 404 00:45:45,700 --> 00:45:49,060 There's another page from the coffee table book that I handed out there. 405 00:45:49,300 --> 00:45:58,390 So the point of this equation, physically, scientifically, is that the solutions of it usually are travelling waves. 406 00:45:59,500 --> 00:46:04,540 If you're a mathematician, you can prove that other solutions also exist, but they tend to be unstable. 407 00:46:04,540 --> 00:46:09,729 The stable solutions are travelling waves and they take a particular form. 408 00:46:09,730 --> 00:46:14,110 Sorry, that looks like an infinite slope. I shouldn't have done that with a finite slope. 409 00:46:15,090 --> 00:46:23,669 So at a particular time it will look like that and then it will move at a certain speed and indeed far away from boundaries. 410 00:46:23,670 --> 00:46:31,530 There exist solutions with precisely this form of a constant shape that translate and translate at a constant speed. 411 00:46:33,840 --> 00:46:38,549 So the equation is you t equals. 412 00:46:38,550 --> 00:46:41,810 I'll put an epsilon in front of the diffusion term. 413 00:46:42,740 --> 00:46:59,020 Plus you minus u squared. And this is prototypical of all sorts of pdes that blend together a linear bit of physics and a non-linear bit of physics. 414 00:46:59,320 --> 00:47:02,470 So this this is the linear diffusion term. 415 00:47:05,750 --> 00:47:09,260 And this is the nonlinear reaction term. 416 00:47:14,580 --> 00:47:20,100 Diffusion is a reasonably clear word. Reaction sort of means pretty much anything nonlinear. 417 00:47:21,650 --> 00:47:24,680 To model this, we can do just the sort of thing we did before. 418 00:47:25,580 --> 00:47:31,130 The simplest model would be the end, plus one minus the N divided by K. 419 00:47:33,470 --> 00:47:40,610 Is equal to. Well, you just do one term for that and another for this, and that will work. 420 00:47:41,000 --> 00:47:47,840 So we would say, just as with the heat equation, we'd say v j plus one minus to the J plus v minus one. 421 00:47:49,380 --> 00:47:56,220 Divided by H squared. So that's an H, so that's our diffusion term. 422 00:47:56,730 --> 00:48:04,290 And then the reaction term we could put in simply like this v j minus v j square. 423 00:48:07,680 --> 00:48:12,120 And that worked fine. Again, we're going to need a time stamp sufficiently small for it to work. 424 00:48:12,120 --> 00:48:17,910 But assuming the time stamp is small, that works fine. And if we want we could write it in matrix form. 425 00:48:18,210 --> 00:48:21,870 We would have V and plus one equals matrix times vector. 426 00:48:24,520 --> 00:48:34,370 So that would be the linear part of the problem. But then, of course, we'd have to add in a nonlinear term, so we'd have to choose your own notation. 427 00:48:34,390 --> 00:48:41,080 But it turns out it's the timestamp times this non-linear vector v j minus v square. 428 00:48:46,330 --> 00:48:51,850 So I have a code that we can run for that. It's called M 38 feature KPP. 429 00:48:51,850 --> 00:48:53,830 And you'll see it looks just like the heat equation. 430 00:48:54,010 --> 00:49:01,959 Except that I've added this additional term k times you might achieve squared, but non-linear problems are always more interesting. 431 00:49:01,960 --> 00:49:11,820 And let's see what it looks like. So this is M 38. 432 00:49:21,560 --> 00:49:24,890 So that's the initial condition I've chosen. 433 00:49:25,070 --> 00:49:28,969 And the reason for choosing this is that I want to illustrate this wonderful 434 00:49:28,970 --> 00:49:33,500 feature of nonlinearity that you can have a preferred shape of a solution. 435 00:49:33,950 --> 00:49:39,770 So this is just an arbitrary initial condition. But if I let time evolve. 436 00:49:42,050 --> 00:49:47,210 Almost any initial condition will converge towards the shape of the travelling wave. 437 00:49:47,510 --> 00:49:58,620 So look at this. And now it's exponentially close, if you like, to this way, which in principle would go forever except at the right boundary. 438 00:49:58,620 --> 00:50:02,760 I have a boundary condition, but on an infinite domain that would simply go forever. 439 00:50:02,940 --> 00:50:12,180 Let's run that a couple more times. So there's other initial effect which is complicated. 440 00:50:12,480 --> 00:50:20,760 Not much travelling is happening yet, but then eventually it settles down and the slope gets a little less and it reaches this steady effect. 441 00:50:20,940 --> 00:50:27,630 And of course, you can interpret this physically in all sorts of waves of heat or information flowing from one part to another. 442 00:50:28,260 --> 00:50:39,990 This very simple model is philosophically, if you like, very much like the Hodgkin Huxley equations, which describe how pulses flow in neurones. 443 00:50:44,480 --> 00:50:50,480 And the last thing I'll do is show you that it too goes unstable if you take the time, step too big. 444 00:50:50,990 --> 00:50:56,180 So let's run the unstable version where I change .42.51. 445 00:50:57,980 --> 00:51:02,690 So I say 30. Thank you for unstable same initial condition. 446 00:51:06,070 --> 00:51:10,100 Who knows what's happening? Looks like a shark. 447 00:51:12,200 --> 00:51:15,650 Okay. See you on Friday. I resigned. 448 00:51:16,130 --> 00:51:16,760 Oh, yes.