2 MA515 Notes
2 MA515 Notes
2 MA515 Notes
S. Sivaji Ganesh
Department of Mathematics
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
v
40 Chapter 2. First order PDE
Further, let us find a particular solution of the given PDE which satisfies
the Cauchy data given by
x = s 2 , y = 2s, z = s, 0 ≤ s ≤ 1.
By imposing the above conditions, the arbitrary F gets fixed. Note that
z2 s2
x − 2 = C1 implies that 2 = C1 . Also note that y − z = C2 implies that
s = C2 . Thus we get a relation between C1 , C2 , namely, C22 = 2C1 . This
gives us the relation
For a given space curve Γ , recall that Cauchy problem for the quasilnear
equation (QL)
condition
u ( f (s), g (s)) = h(s)
for s belonging to a subinterval of I .
Geometrically speaking, Cauchy problem consists of finding an integral
surface on which at least a piece of the datum curve Γ lies.
The hypotheses and notations introduced in Subsection 2.3.1 will be in
force throughout this section. Further, the projection of Γ to Ω2 is denoted
by Γ2 .
In this section, existence of a solution to the Cauchy problem for the
equation (QL) is proved under the assumption that base characteristic curves
and the curve Γ2 intersect transversally. The proof is constructive but for
a last minute appeal to inverse function theorem whose assertion is only
existential. The constructive part of the proof is known as the method of
characteristics. Cauchy problems for which the transversality condition
fails are also analyzed.
A brief outline of the section: A trial run of the method of character-
istics is carried out for linear and semilinear equations in Subsection 2.4.1.
After understanding the connection between an integral surface and the
family of characteristic curves associated to the quasilinear equation (QL)
in Subsection 2.4.2, a local existence result is proved in Subsection 2.4.3 un-
der a transversality condition. Failure of the transversality condition and
its consequences to Cauchy problems are analyzed in Subsection 2.4.4.
Reasons behind the local nature of the existence result are discussed in
Subsection 2.4.5. Cauchy problem for quasilinear equations in more than
two independent variables is discussed in Subsection 2.4.6.
dx dx
= a(x, y) = a(x, y)
dt dt
dy dy
= b (x, y) = b (x, y)
dt dt
dz dz
= c(x, y)z + d (x, y) = c(x, y, z)
dt dt
Note that for linear equation (L) and semilinear equation (SL),the sys-
tem of characteristic equations decouple into two sets of equations: A sys-
tem of two equations for variables x and y which does not involve the vari-
able z, and a single equation for the variable z that can be solved given a
solution (x(t ), y(t )) of the first two equations. In other words, base charac-
teristics which are defined as the projections of characteristic curves to Ω2 ,
can be determined directly without the knowledge of characteristic curves
since the equations for x and y do not involve the variable z.
An idea to solve Cauchy problem for linear and semilinear equations
Step 1 Through every point ( f (s), g (s)) ∈ Γ2 , pass a base characteristic curve
i.e., for each s ∈ I find solutions (x(t ), y(t )) to the initial value prob-
lem
dx dy
= a(x, y), = b (x, y), x(0) = f (s), y(0) = g (s)
dt dt
and take their traces to get base characteristic curves through ( f (s), g (s)).
As we have assumed that a, b ∈ C 1 (Ω3 ), it follows that a, b ∈ C 1 (Ω2 ).
Therefore the functions a, b are locally Lipschitz on Ω2 and therefore
exactly one base characteristic passes through ( f (s), g (s)). Let the so-
lutions be denoted by x = X (t , s) and y = Y (t , s).
dz
= c (X (t , s), Y (t , s)) z + d (X (t , s), Y (t , s))
dt
in the case of linear equation, and by
dz
= c (X (t , s), Y (t , s), z)
dt
in the case of semilinear equation.
In the case of linear equation, the equation for z is linear in z with
variable coefficients, and hence Z(t , s) can be determined for all t
for which X (t , s), Y (t , s) were found. On the other hand, in the
case of semilinear equation, the equation for z is a nonlinear differen-
tial equation and hence Z(t , s) may not be found for all t for which
X (t , s), Y (t , s ) were found. This is because linear ODEs have global
Define a function V : J � → � by
dx dy
V � (t ) = z � (t ) − u x (x(t ), y(t )) (t ) − uy (x(t ), y(t )) (t )
dt dt
= c (x(t ), y(t ), z(t )) − u x (x(t ), y(t )) a (x(t ), y(t ), z(t ))
− uy (x(t ), y(t )) b (x(t ), y(t ), z(t ))
= c (x(t ), y(t ),V (t ) + u (x(t ), y(t )))
− u x (x(t ), y(t )) a (x(t ), y(t ),V (t ) + u (x(t ), y(t )))
− uy (x(t ), y(t )) b (x(t ), y(t ),V (t ) + u (x(t ), y(t ))) .
Thus we have got a formula for f (t , U ), but we need to find its domain
i.e., the values of (t , U ) for which formula for f (t , U ) is meaningful. Since
P ∈ Ω3 , by taking a subinterval of J � if necessary, we find that there exists
a δ > 0 such that f is meaningful on the domain J � × (−δ, δ). Note that
f ∈ C 1 (J � × (−δ, δ)) as the functions a, b , c ∈ C 1 (Ω3 ) and u ∈ C 1 (D).
Note that
holds.
Since S is a union of characteristic curves, and P ∈ S, it follows that
there is a characteristic curve γP passing through � P , and γP ⊆ S. Since� nor-
mal to the surface S at P is in the direction of u x (x, y), uy (x, y), −1 , and
(a(x, y, u(x, y)), b (x, y, u(x, y)), c(x, y, u(x, y))) is the direction of tangent
to γP at P , we get (2.40). This completes the proof of (2) =⇒ (1).
Corollary 2.31. Let S1 and S2 be two integral surfaces for the equation (QL)
such that their intersection is non-empty. Let P ∈ S1 ∩ S2 . Then some part of
the characteristic curve passing through P lies on both S1 and S2 .
Two surfaces in �3 are said to touch each other at a point if they have
a common tangent plane at that point. We have the following result con-
cerning curves lying on the intersection of two integral surfaces.
Corollary 2.33. If a curve γ lies on two integral surfaces for the equation
(QL) which intersect without touching at all points of γ , then γ is a character-
istic curve.
We did not use Theorem 2.29 in proving Corollary 2.33, and hence a
question on its naming arises. Terming it as corollary is acceptable as one
can prove Corollary 2.33 using Theorem 2.29, and is left as an exercise
(Exercise 2.18).
Remark 2.34. Corollary 2.33 is concerned with two integral surfaces which
intersect without touching. Further if their intersection is a curve, by
Corollary 2.33, the curve must be a characteristic curve for equation (QL).
Thus, we come across such integral surfaces when a Cauchy problem has
more than one solution.
Recall that in Example 2.6, we found that the Cauchy problem has in-
ifinitely many solutions, which are of the form u(x, y) = e x T (y), where
T is a differentiable function such that T (0) = 1. Consider two integral
surfaces S : z = u(x, y) and S̃ : z = ũ(x, y), defined by u : �2 → � and
ũ : �2 → � given by
The two integral surfaces intersect all along the datum curve. In Figure 2.4,
S is depicted in black colour, S̃ is shown in blue colour, and the datum
curve in red colour. In getting these integral surfaces, we used the idea that
if two integral surfaces touch each other at a point, then they have the same
tangent plane at the point of intersection i.e., normal (u x , uy , −1) for both
integral surfaces would be the same. In the examples, we made sure that
normals are not the same.
The reader is encouraged to construct a few examples of pairs of integral
surfaces as above for Example 2.6.
Figure 2.4. S : z = e x+y (in black), S̃ : z = e x−y (in blue), Datum curve (in red)
dx dy dz
= a(x, y, z), = b (x, y, z), = c(x, y, z) (chara.ODE)
dt dt dt
satisfying the initial conditions
Figure 2.5. Weaving an integral surface using characteristic curves (in blue) around the Da-
tum curve (in red)
Φ : J × I → Ω2
(t , s) �−→ (X (t , s ), Y (t , s)) . (2.44)
� � � �
� X (0, s) X (0, s) � � a ( f (s), g (s ), h(s)) f � (s) �
� t s � � �
J (0, s) = � �=� �.
� Y (0, s) Y (0, s) � � b ( f (s), g (s ), h(s)) g � (s) �
t s
(i) an open subset E of J ×I containing the point (0, s0 ) , and an open sub-
set F of Ω2 containing the point (X (0, s0 ), Y (0, s0 )) i.e., ( f (s0 ), g (s0 )),
(ii) a continuously differentiable function Ψ : F → E such that
Ψ ◦ Φ = IE , Φ ◦ Ψ = IF , (2.45)
Denoting Ψ(x, y) = (T (x, y), S(x, y)), for (t , s) ∈ E, the equations (2.45)
yield
t = T (x, y), s = S(x, y).
Recall that Z(t , s) was expected to be the value of a solution at the point
(X (t , s), Y (t , s)), we are now in a position to define a candidate for being a
solution to the Cauchy problem (QL)-(2.37).
Define a function
c (X (t , s), Y (t , s), Z(t , s)) = u x (X (t , s), Y (t , s)) a (X (t , s), Y (t , s), Z(t , s))
+ uy (X (t , s), Y (t , s )) b (X (t , s), Y (t , s), Z(t , s)) .
(2.49)
c (x, y, u(x, y)) = u x (x, y) a (x, y, u(x, y)) + uy (x, y) b (x, y, u(x, y)) .
Conclusion
(i) The Cauchy problem (QL)-(2.37) has a solution defined on a neighbour-
hood of the point (x0 , y0 ) ∈ Ω2 .
(ii) Let D1 and D2 be open neighbourhoods of the point (x0 , y0 ), and let u1 :
D1 → � and u2 : D2 → � be solutions to the Cauchy problem (QL)-
(2.37). Then u1 ≡ u2 on some subset of D1 ∩ D2 containing the point
(x0 , y0 ). That is, solution to the Cauchy problem is locally unique, near
the datum curve Γ .
S1 ≡ S2 in a neighbourhood of P0 ,
Remark 2.37. (i) Recall that a function u was defined in the equation
(2.46) which was later shown to be a soluton to the equation (QL) in
Step 3 of the proof of existence theorem. We give a geometric proof
of the same.
The surface S given by the equation (2.50) has parametric equations
Remark 2.38. At the end of Step 1 in the proof of Theorem 2.36, a parametrized
surface (2.41) was obtained as the union of characteristic curves. The func-
tions describing the parametrized surface are continously differentiable
functions of the parameters t ∈ J and s ∈ I . This is a consequence of dif-
ferentiable dependence of solutions to initial value problems in the theory
of ODEs: smoothness in t is due to the smoothness of the characteristic
vector field defined by (QL); and the smoothness in s is through the initial
conditions for characteristic system of ODEs which in turn are coming
from the description of the datum curve, as noted in the proof of Theo-
rem 2.36.
As shown in Step 2 in the proof of Theorem 2.36, the parametrized sur-
face (2.41) represents an integral surface locally whenever the transversality
condition is satisfied.
Thus the representation (2.41) misleads us to believe that Cauchy prob-
lems always possess a solution. As we shall see later, in Examples 2.40, 2.42,
and 2.44, parametrized surface (2.41) have singularities at points of the da-
tum curve which correspond to failure of the transversality condition.
u x = 0,
Γ : x = 0, y = s, z = sin s, s ∈ �.
dx dy dz
= 1, = 0, = 0.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = 0, y(0) = s, z(0) = sin s
is given by
x = X (t , s) = t , y = Y (t , s) = s, z = Z(t , s) = sin s.
s = S(x, y) = y, t = T (x, y) = x.
u x + uy + u = 1,
Figure 2.6. Example 2.39: Integral surface (in blue), datum curve (in magenta), characteristic
curves (in black)
Γ : x = s, y = s + s 2 , z = sin s, s > 0.
dx dy dz
= 1, = 1, = 1 − z.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = s, y(0) = s + s 2 , z(0) = sin s
is given by
Figure 2.7. Example 2.40: Integral surface (in blue), datum curve (in green)
Example 2.41. Consider the Cauchy problem for the linear partial differ-
ential equation
x u x − y uy = u − y, for x ∈ �, y > 0
Γ : x = s 2 , y = s, z = s, s > 0.
dx dy dz
= x, = −y, = z − y.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = s 2 , y(0) = s, z(0) = s
is given by
s � −t �
x = X (t , s) = s 2 e t , y = Y (t , s) = s e −t , z = Z(t , s) = e + et .
2
From the first two equations, we get
Example 2.42. Consider the Cauchy problem for the linear partial differ-
ential equation
2
u x + 3y 3 uy = 2, (2.52)
where the Cauchy data is given by u(x, 1) = 1 + x for all x ∈ �.
Let us parametrize the given Cauchy data as
Γ : x = s, y = 1, z = 1 + s, s ∈ �.
dx dy 2 dz
= 1, = 3y 3 , = 2.
dt dt dt
Sivaji IIT Bombay
2.4. Cauchy problem for quasilinear PDE 61
Figure 2.8. Example 2.41: Integral surface (in blue), datum curve (in green)
x = X (t , s) = t + s, y = Y (t , s) = (t + 1)3 , z = Z(t , s) = 2t + s + 1.
Note that the integral surface contains the entire datum curve Γ . The inte-
gral surface is shown in Figure 2.9.
Figure 2.9. Example 2.42: Views of integral surface (in green), datum curve (in magenta)
which vanishes at all points (t , s) for which t = −1. These are pre-
cisely the points on the line x = z, y = 0. This observation shows
that one may not be able to solve the Cauchy problem if the datum
curve lies on the line x = z, y = 0, and this problem is analyzed in
Example 2.53.
3. The PDE (2.52) is defined for all (x, y) ∈ �2 , however the Cauchy
problem does not have a solution defined on �2 . This example shows
that Cauchy problems for even linear equations need not have solu-
tions defined on the domain Ω2 .
Contrast this situation with an IVP associated to a linear ODE which
always admits global solutions. Thus theory of linear PDEs is more
complicated than that of linear ODEs.
(sin u) u x + uy = 0,
Γ : x = 0, y = s, z = s, s ∈ �.
dx dy dz
= sin z, = 1, = 0.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = 0, y(0) = s, z(0) = s
is given by
(y − u) sin(u) − x = 0. (2.54)
∂φ
(0, y0 , y0 ) = − sin y0 ,
∂z
which is not equal to zero whenever y0 is not an integral multiple of π.
Thus we are in a position to apply implicit function theorem which asserts
that u can be expressed as a function (x, y) in a neighbourhood of (x0 , y0 )
whenever y0 is not an integral multiple of π.
Thus we conclude the existence of a local solution to the Cauchy prob-
lem at all points on the datum curve except at the points (0, mπ, mπ)
where m ∈ �.
Example 2.46. This example illustrates the local nature of solutions guar-
anteed by the existence and uniqueness theorem, namely, the Cauchy prob-
lem may not have a solution that is defined on all of Ω2 . In this example
Ω2 is the domain �2 \ { (0, 0) }.
Two Cauchy problems for the linear partial differential equation
−y u x + x uy = 0 (2.55)
will be considered. Note that the equation is defined for all (x, y) ∈ �2
such that (x, y) �= (0, 0).
dx dy dz
= −y, = x, = 0. (2.56)
dt dt dt
From equations (2.56), it follows that the base characteristics are the family
of circles x 2 +y 2 = C 2 (indexed by C > 0) centered at the origin, and having
radius C . Note that the third equation in (2.56) implies that any solution
to the equation (2.55) is constant on each member of the family of base
characteristics.
Γ : x = s, y = 0, z = s, s ∈ � \ {0}.
Γ � where s0 ∈ I � . Denote
� �
� a ( f (s), g (s ), h(s)) f � (s) �
� �
J (0, s) := � �.
� b ( f (s), g (s ), h(s)) g � (s) �
Since u is a solution to the quasilinear equation (QL), and h(s) = u( f (s), g (s))
holds for s ∈ I � , we have
Proof. Proof of (i): Denote the tangential direction to the datum curve Γ
at the point P0 by v := (v1 , v2 , v3 ). Choose any direction (i.e., a non-zero
vector) w := (w1 , w2 , w3 ) such that the set { (v1 , v2 ), (w1 , w2 )} is linearly in-
dependent in �2 , and choose any curve � Γ ⊂ Ω3 through P0 such that the
�
tangent to Γ at P0 is in the direction of w. As a consequence, J�Γ (P0 ) �= 0.
Then, by Theorem 2.36, there exists a unique integral surface S� for equa-
tion (QL) containing a piece of � Γ in a neighbourhood of P0 . Then the
integral surface S� also contains a part of Γ containing P0 , as Γ is a charac-
teristic curve through P0 . Note that the tangent plane at P0 to the integral
surface S� contains the two vectors v and w. In fact, the tangent plane is
given by the subspace of �3 spanned by the two vectors v and w translated
to the point P0 .
Since there are an infinite number of directions w having the property
that the set { (v1 , v2 ), (w1 , w2 )} is linearly independent in �2 , we get an infi-
nite number of integral surfaces such that a part of Γ lies on each of them.
All of these integral surfaces are pairwise distinct since the tangent planes
to the integral surfaces at the point P0 are distinct.
Proof of (ii): Assume that there exists a solution to the Cauchy problem
(QL)-(2.37). By Lemma 2.47, the datum curve Γ must be a characteristic
curve. This contradicts our assumption on Γ . Thus we conclude that the
Cauchy problem does not admit a solution. This completes the proof of
(ii).
� �
� 1 0 �
� �
J (0, s) := � � = 1,
� 0 1 �
which is non-zero for every s ∈ �. In other words, the transversal-
ity condition is satisfied. Thus Example 2.5 confirms the assertion of
Theorem 2.36 that the Cauchy problem has a unique solution.
(ii) In Example 2.6, the Jacobian J (0, s) is given by
� �
� 1 1 �
� �
J (0, s) := � � = 0,
� 0 0 �
for every s ∈ �. Note that at every point P ( f (s), g (s), h(s)) of Γ (i.e.,
for every s ∈ �), the following equalities hold
� �
(a(P ), b (P ), c(P )) = f � (s), g � (s), h � (s) = (1, 0, c e c s ).
That is, the characteristic direction coincides with the tangential direc-
tion for datum curve. Thus the datum curve is a characteristic curve,
and hence by Lemma 2.49 the characteristic Cauchy problem has in-
finitely many solutions. This was already observed in Example 2.6.
(iii) In Example 2.7, the Jacobian J (0, s) is given by
� �
� 1 1 �
� �
J (0, s) := � � = 0,
� 0 0 �
for every s ∈ �. However, the datum curve is not a characteristic
curve and hence it has no solutions. Even though the transversality
condition is not satisfied for both Examples 2.6 and 2.7, the datum
curve turns out to be a characteristic curve in the case of Example 2.6
and not in the case of Example 2.7. This results in an infinite number
of solutions in the former, while solutions do not exist in the later.
(i) There exists an interval containing s0 such that the Jacobian J (0, s)
vanishes at all points of the interval.
(ii) The point s0 is an isolated root of the equation J (0, s) = 0 i.e., there
exists an interval containing s0 such that the Jacobian J (0, s) is never
zero on the interval except at s0 .
(iii) The point s0 is not an isolated root of the equation J (0, s) = 0 i.e., there
exists a sequence (sn ) such that J (0, sn ) = 0, and sn → s0 as n → ∞.
Example 2.52. In this example, we consider the Cauchy problem for the
quasilinear partial differential equation
x 2 u x − y u uy = 0,
Γ : x = s, y = s, z = s ln s, s ∈ (0, ∞).
dx dy dz
= x 2, = −y z, = 0.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = s, y(0) = s, z(0) = s ln s
is given by
s
x = X (t , s) = , y = Y (t , s) = s e −(s ln s )t , z = Z(t , s) = s ln s. (2.58)
1− st
z
From the relations (2.58), we get x = ln y
. Thus, a solution is given by
u(x, y) = x ln y,
Note that the integral surface contains the entire datum curve Γ .
In this example, note that the Jacobian J (0, s) is given by
� �
� s 2
1 �
� �
J (0, s) = � � = s 2 (1 + ln s).
� −s 2 ln s 1 �
Since s ∈ (0, ∞), the Jacobian J (0, s) is zero only at s = e −1 . Also note that
at s = e −1 , the datum curve has characteristic direction viz. (e −2 , e −2 , 0).
Example 2.53. In this example, we consider the Cauchy problem for the
linear partial differential equation
2
u x + 3y 3 uy = 2, (2.59)
for every s ∈ �. Thus transversality condition does not hold. Note that the
datum curve Γ does not have a characteristic direction at any of its points.
As a consequence, in view of Lemma 2.49, the Cauchy problem does not
have a solution. In other words, there is no continuously differentiable
function which solves the Cauchy problem.
Despite knowing the answer, we attempt to solve the Cauchy problem
by the method of characteristics, as we are curious to know where it would
lead us to.
Let us parametrize the given Cauchy data as
Γ : x = s, y = 0, z = s, s ∈ �.
dx dy 2 dz
= 1, = 3y 3 , = 2.
dt dt dt
The characteristic system of ODE along with the initial conditions
x = X (t , s) = t + s, y = Y (t , s) = 0, z = Z(t , s) = 2t + s, (2.60)
x = X (t , s) = t + s, y = Y (t , s) = t 3 , z = Z(t , s) = 2t + s, (2.61)
�
0 if t < α,
x = X (t , s) = t +s, y = Y (t , s) = , z = Z(t , s) = 2t +s
(t − α)3 if t ≥ α.
where α ∈ [0, ∞), which is not unexpected since the function y �→ y 2/3
is not Lipschitz on any interval containing zero. Also observe that all the
characteristic curves listed above pass through the point (s, 0, s) ∈ Γ .
The equations in (2.60) parametrically represent the z x-plane in �3 .
Since z x-plane is not the graph of any function of the independent vari-
ables x, y, it cannot be an integral surface corresponding to the given PDE.
On the other hand, the equations in (2.61) may be re-written as
z = 2x − s, y = (x − s)3 , (2.62)
u(x, y) = x + y 1/3 .
Figure 2.10. Example 2.44: Views of integral surface (in green), datum curve (in magenta)
dy
= f (x, y), y(x0 ) = y0 ,
dx
where f : I × � → � (I is an interval in �) is a continuous function. A
solution to the IVP whose domain is the interval I is called a global solution,
otherwise a local solution. Recall that Cauchy-Lipschitz-Picard existence
theorem guarantees the existence of a local solution to the IVP, while there
are sufficient conditions on f under which the IVP has a global solution.
In the context of a Cauchy problem for first order PDE, there are two
notions of local and global solutions. They are
(i) A solution to a Cauchy problem is said to be a global solution (w.r.t.
datum curve) if the corresponding integral surface contains the entire
datum curve, otherwise the solution is called a local solution (w.r.t.
datum curve).
(ii) A solution to a Cauchy problem is said to be a global solution (w.r.t.
domain) if the solution is defined on the domain Ω2 , otherwise the
solution is called a local solution (w.r.t. domain).
Since Γ2 ⊂ Ω2 , if a solution is global (w.r.t. domain), then it is also global
(w.r.t. datum curve). Observe that if a solution is local (w.r.t. datum
curve), then it is also a local solution (w.r.t. domain). Recall that Theo-
rem 2.36 asserted the existence of a local solution (w.r.t. datum curve) to
the Cauchy problem.
We explore the reasons why Cauchy problems may not have global so-
lutions and illustrate them with the help of examples.
1. Recall that base characteristic curves are defined as projection to Ω2
of the characteristic curves in Ω3 . On the other hand, for a semilinear
equation we noted in Subsection 2.4.1 that base characteristic curves
may be found independent of characteristic curves. Further, we ob-
served in Step 2 (in the proof of Theorem 2.36) that the equation for z
may not admit solutions for all t for which base characteristics, which
are given by x = X (t , s), y = Y (t , s), are defined. This might result
in a situation where projection of a characteristic curve may not be
the entire base characteristic curve that was determined directly using
the first two equations from (chara.ODE). The following example
exhibits this possibility, and is a simpler version of Example 2.23.
u x + uy = u 2 , for x ∈ �, y ∈ � (2.63)
Γ : x = s, y = 0, z = s, s ∈ �.
dx dy dz
= 1, = 1, = z 2.
dt dt dt
Solution of the characteristic system of ODE satisfying the initial con-
ditions
x(0) = s, y(0) = 0, z(0) = s
is given by
1
x = X (t , s) = t + s, y = Y (t , s) = t , z = Z(t , s) = .
s−t
From the first two equations, we get
s = S(x, y) = x − y, t = T (x, y) = y.
�
d
ai (x1 , x2 , · · · , xd , u)u xi = c(x1 , x2 , · · · , xd , u), (d-QL)
i =1
xi = fi (s1 , s2 , · · · , sd −1 ), i = 1, 2, · · · , d ,
z = h(s1 , s2 , · · · , sd −1 ),
d xi
= ai (x1 , x2 , · · · , xd , z), i = 1, 2, · · · , d , (2.64a)
dt
dz
= c(x1 , x2 , · · · , xd , z) (2.64b)
dt
Let the solutions to the characteristic system of ODE (2.64) satisfying the
initial conditions
be given by
xi = Xi (t , s1 , s2 , · · · , sd −1 ) (i = 1, 2, · · · , d ), z = Z(t , s1 , s2 , · · · , sd −1 ). (2.65)
� �
� ∂ f1 ∂ f1 �
� (s) ··· (s) a1 ( f1 (s), f2 (s), · · · , fd (s)) �
� ∂ s1 ∂ sd −1 �
� ∂ f2 ∂ f2 �
� (s) ··· (s) a2 ( f1 (s), f2 (s), · · · , fd (s)) ��
J (0, s) = �� ∂ s1 ∂ sd −1
� �= 0.
� ··· ··· ··· ······ �
� �
� ∂ fd
···
∂ fd
a f f · · · , f �
� ∂ s1
(s) ∂ sd −1
(s) (
d 1 (s), 2 (s), d (s)) �
where s stands for the vector (s1 , s2 , · · · , sd −1 ), or we may assume that J (0, s0 ) �=
0 for some s0 . Under the transversality condition, we can apply inverse
function theorem, and obtain functions Si , T such that
si = Si (x1 , x2 , · · · , xd ) (i = 1, · · · , d ), t = T (x1 , x2 , · · · , xd ).
Example 2.56. Let k ∈ �. Consider the Cauchy problem for the equation
x1 u x1 + x2 u x2 + x3 u x3 = k u,
where the Cauchy data is given by u(x1 , x2 , 1) = h(x1 , x2 ) for all (x1 , x2 ) ∈
�2 , h ∈ C 1 (�2 ).
Let us parametrize the given Cauchy data as
d xi dz
= xi (i = 1, 2, 3), = k z.
dt dt
For each (s1 , s2 ) ∈ �2 , the solution of the characteristic system of ODE
satisfying the initial conditions
is given by
xi = Xi (t , s1 , s2 ) = si e t (i = 1, 2), x3 = X3 (t , s1 , s2 ) = e t , (2.66a)
defined for all (x1 , x2 , x3 ) ∈ �3 for which x3 �= 0. For each λ ∈ � such that
λ �= 0, observe that the function u given by (2.67) satisfies
for some functions a, b , c. Thus we may say that we are considering equa-
tions which are more general than quasilinear equations.
Our analysis of equation (GE) draws inspiration from that of (QL),
and frequent comparisons to it will be made throughout the presentation