Text Errata

Post by **goodwine** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:08 am

Post any errors that you find in the course text below. To aid in avoiding any repeats, please do it as follows:

In the subject put something like

"page xx, line yy"

then in the body of the post put the error. If it's near the bottom of the page put "page xx, line -yy," meaning the error is yy lines up from the bottom. Count equations as lines as well.

Points:

typos = 1 homework point
substantive errors = 10 homework points
really major errors = 10's of homework points

Obviously what constitutes the distinction between these three types of errors is a matter of degree. I'll use my best judgment to allocate points fairly.

Only the first person to post an error will receive any credit, so try not to repeat any others that have already been posted.

tmalecek · Post by **tmalecek** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:14 pm

typo

may should be many.

tmalecek · Post by **tmalecek** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:19 pm

typo

me should be be.

tmalecek · Post by **tmalecek** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:54 pm

cantalever should be cantilever.

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:51 pm

An example of the way the Cartesian product is used is when vectors are use to represent something.

I think use should be used.

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:52 pm

so that is typed twice

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:05 pm

typo

propery should be properly

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:22 pm

function should be functions

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:23 pm

the same example is given twice

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:18 pm

page v, line 9 cantalever --> cantilever
page 31, line 9 cantalever -->cantilever

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:21 pm

page x, line 7 Dispursion --> Dispersion
page 379, line 2 Dispursion --> Dispersion

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:23 pm

page xiii, line 2 satify --> satisfy

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:24 pm

page xviii, line 4 proporational --> proportional

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:26 pm

page xviii, line 13 inversted --> inverted

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:06 pm

Page vi
Line 11
Dispursion --> Dispersion

page ix
line 2
satify --> satisfy

page 3
line 18
equaitons --> equations

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:12 pm

page 5
line 30
varible --> variable

page 6
line 1
satify --> satisfy (in figure 1.1 caption)

page 6
line 20
"is" typed twice

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:17 pm

page 7
line 16
requre --> require

page 8
footnote line 5
indepenent --> independent

page 9
line 2
higest --> highest

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:21 pm

page 11
line 6
coefficent --> coefficient

page 12
line 22
"then" typed twice

page 13
line 30
"will" typed twice

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:26 pm

page 13
line 32
solustions --> solutions

page 16
line 11
Every body --> Everybody

page 17
footnote line 1
enviroment --> environment

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:30 pm

page 18
line 18
"were" typed twice

page 21
line 7
compnents --> components

page 22
line 2
magintude --> magnitude

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:38 pm

page 22
line 6
orthongonal --> orthogonal

page 22
line 17
"will" typed twice

page 17
line 20
can not --> cannot

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:40 pm

correction from last post:
page 27 (not 17)
line 20
can not --> cannot

page 27
line 29
soluiton --> solution

page 28
line 9
can not --> cannot

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:50 pm

page 38
line 15
compter --> computer

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:49 am

typo

"the thermal capacitance related the rate of change..."

"related" should be "relates"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:52 am

typo

"... the methods in both sections 2.3.2 and 2.3.2 could be..."

2.3.2 listed twice, don't know what correct number should be

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:58 am

typo

"The rate of metabolism of many drugs are described..."

has to be either "rates of metabolism of many drugs are" or "rate of metabolism of many drugs is"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:01 am

"In some cases, the constant is either very large or very small compared to the blood concentration of the drug that some simplifications are possible."

should be: "...concentration of the drug so that some simplifications..."

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:04 am

typo

"...their simple structure lend themselves to certain solution methods..."

"structure" should be "structures"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:09 am

incomplete sentence

"Since it is the homogeneoous solution that is needed, a solution of the form of equation 2.8, not of the form of equation 2.10."

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:15 am

"due to the fact that partial differential need to be covered..."

should be "...partial differential equations needed..." i think

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:24 pm

typo

"...which is then substituted in to the differential equation..."

"in to" should be "into"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:25 pm

extra word

"...setting it equal to the initial ocndition will give an equation to for c."

should be:
"give an equation for c."

bslaboch · Post by **bslaboch** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:18 am

mu(t) + t + c. should be mu(t) = t + c.

bslaboch · Post by **bslaboch** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:20 am

missing a negative sign on e^(alpha*t)

colinheye · Post by **colinheye** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 1:37 pm

Equation 2.3 is listed as homogeneous, but in class definition, only linear equations could be defined as homogeneous.

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:31 pm

the bottom parameter of the integral says t + 0 when it should say t0

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:36 pm

should be + vmaxg and not -

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:41 pm

could remove - sign in front of equation instead of changing equation 2.3 to + vmaxg to make the two equations equal

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:55 pm

the top boundary of the interval should be t not t0

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:18 pm

the h(s)ds should be h(t)dt based on equation 2.18

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:20 pm

dependent should be changed to independent variable on the other side of the equation

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:21 pm

typo

first word, of, should be changed to for

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:36 pm

where f and g are functions of both the independent variable, t and .....

need a comma after t

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:36 pm

and should be changed to an

ascott5 · Post by **ascott5** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:58 pm

I think it should say "multiply the assumed form by the independent variable." instead of dependent.

alombar1 · Post by **alombar1** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:13 pm

problem 2.2 section 1 should be denotes and not denote.

mbeaucla · Post by **mbeaucla** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:40 pm

"Since," or "so," should be removed

Post by **goodwine** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:08 pm

aoconno5 wrote:In problem 2.2 for the homework it reads:

1. If x(0) denote the amount present

Should it be denotes? I didn't know where to post this because it's not really a homework question.

Reposted from homework.

adam_mathews · Post by **adam_mathews** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:02 pm

2.3 Separable equations. page 51.

if it is possible to put all the terms that are a function of the dependent variable on one side of the equation
and all the terms that are a function of the dependent variable on the other side of the equation the equation
is separable. In

This is entirely confusing. You say that the same type of terms have to be on different sides of the equal sign. Perhaps saying "all terms that contain the dependent variable" would work?

Adam Mathews[/code]

dseibel · Post by **dseibel** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:36 am

Page 46 towards the bottom

4th to last equation, one of the terms needs a negative sign, it should read e^(- alpha * t) as of now it reads e^(alpha * t)

Also, 2nd to last equation on page 46 should read u(t) = t + c for differentiation, right now it reads u(t) + t + c

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:59 pm

should say "a few prototypical example problems" instead of just "problem"

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:15 pm

should say "An example is" and not "was"

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:22 pm

x2 is actually a derivative with respect to t, so it's missing a dot.

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:45 pm

should be "examples" instead of "example"

TyBaker · Post by **TyBaker** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:23 pm

page 49
line 11

in example 2.2.1, the "paced in the oven" should be "placed in the oven"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:13 pm

typo

"represents the amount present after the t elapses after the organism dies."

should be "after time t elapses"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:16 pm

"describes the amount of C14 isotope present"

should be "amount of the C14 isotope present"

abrodfue · Post by **abrodfue** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:11 pm

"Variation of parameters works for any form of inhomogeneous term, but is generally more difficult than variation of parameters"
I think the second variation of parameters should be undetermined coefficients

cskinner · Post by **cskinner** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 10:27 pm

For hw#3 Problem 3.11 pg. 78 states Î»2 + 2Î¶Ï‰nÎ¶ + Ï‰2
n = 0 and we are supposed to prove the value of the root is Î» = âˆ’Ï‰n, however in order to prove this I feel like the equation should read:

Î»2 + 2Î»Ï‰n + Ï‰2n = 0

Post by **goodwine** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:20 pm

scox7 wrote:In section 3.4.2, page 74. Just under equation 3.16 there is u1(t) and u2(t), but there's no integral for u2(t). It's the same in the following equations for x particular and the final answer. There should be an integral there correct?

nick_springer · Post by **nick_springer** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:53 pm

page 60, line -6

in Proof: 6th line from bottom.
.... + f1(t)(c1x1(dot)(t) + c2x2(t)) ....
x2 should also have dot.

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:02 am

page 65
line 11
"because" written twice in a row;
"..valuable to know both because because it..."

page 71
line 3
missing space between "details" and "differentiating";
"...gory details, (space needed) differentiating..."

page 74
line -12
can not --> cannot

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:04 am

page 82
line -0 (last line)
betwen --> between

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:37 am

typo
- 2 errors

"of which contains of three solutions. Match the each equation..."

should be
"of which contains three solutions. Match each equation"

parry · Post by **parry** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:41 pm

"w_n = sqrt(km)" should be "w_n = sqrt(k/m)"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:50 pm

typo

"to do this by solving only six equations!"

should be "nine equations"

There's no way to solve 9 graphs with 9 different types of equations by solving for only 6 equations.

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:51 pm

"consider each of these four possible permutations of these cases"

should be
"each of THE four possible permutations"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:52 pm

x'' + 2*zeta*omega_n*x + omega_n^2*x

should be x'' + 2*zeta*omega_n*x' + omega_n^2*x

with xdot in the middle part, not x

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:57 pm

"the natural frequency: omega_n = sqrt(k)*m >0"

should be "omega_n = sqrt(k*m) > 0"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:58 pm

"(only relevant for 0<zeta<1"

this needs the end parenthesis

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:04 pm

"is either ampliphied or attenuated in solution"

should be

"attenuated in THE solution"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:04 pm

"factor versus frequence ration is illustrated"

should be

"frequency ratio" not ration

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:05 pm

"the superposition of two cosine function"

should be "cosine functions"

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:55 am

Starting with equation 3.15 all the way down to the middle of the page, the denominator of each equation is incorrect. The way it is written makes the denominator equal to zero. Each denominator a misplaced dot above one of the terms to signify that that term is a derivative.

moconn10 · Post by **moconn10** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 2:06 am

In the middle of page, "example" should be "examples".

jbartrom · Post by **jbartrom** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:53 pm

From the printed book, it is the last equation that describes the general solution to "Distinct, real roots" in 3.3.1. I think the entire lamda term in the exponent should be multiplied by 't'. In the book, it reads x(t) = -(zeta)(omega_n)t + (omega_n)sqrt((zeta)^2 - 1).

I think it should read x(t) = -(zeta)(omega_n)t + (omega_n)sqrt((zeta)^2 - 1)t so the 't' is carried through both terms.

TonyAshley · Post by **TonyAshley** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:21 pm

shockett wrote:"the natural frequency: omega_n = sqrt(k)*m >0"

should be "omega_n = sqrt(k*m) > 0"

Should be "omega_n = sqrt(k/m) > 0"

colinheye · Post by **colinheye** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:16 pm

the equation is listed as linear but it should not be since there is a u multiplied by its time derivative.

bchynoweth · Post by **bchynoweth** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:25 am

there are two lambda 1's, and two x1(t) when it should be a lambda1 a lambda 2 and an x1(t) and an x2(t)

aoconno5 · Post by **aoconno5** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:33 am

The denominator of the integral

Î¼1 = âˆ’ int [ (x2(t) * f(t)) / (x1(t) * xË™2(t) âˆ’ xË™2(t) * x1(t)) dt] + c1

should be the Wronskian of x1(t) and x2(t) correct? So shouldn't it be:

(x1(t) * xË™2(t) âˆ’ x2(t) * xË™1(t)) ?

gonzo · Post by **gonzo** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:20 pm

"which as roots" should be "which has roots".

gonzo · Post by **gonzo** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:35 pm

variables defined in example 3.3.5 part 2 on page 68 should be substituted into equation 3.10 to yield the shown linear combination.

gonzo · Post by **gonzo** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:35 pm

variables defined in example 3.3.5 part 2 on page 68 should be substituted into equation 3.10 to yield the shown linear combination.

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:11 pm

"the completed solution was the same as the particular..."

should be:

"is the same as the particular"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:13 pm

"the response, x(t) and forcing funtion, f(t) are plotted..."

needs 2 more commas, and should be

"response, x(t), and forcing function, f(t), are..."

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:15 pm

"A specific example, follows, but..."

shoould be

"specific example follows, but" with no first comma

also,

"point that the solution grows with time, is the fundamentally..."

should not have a comma:

"...grows with time is the fundamentally..."

rlavorgn · Post by **rlavorgn** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:45 pm

The derivative of mu(t) exp(-at) should have a negative in the exponent of the second term otherwise the terms dont cancel.

rlavorgn · Post by **rlavorgn** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:00 pm

should be "couple examples"

rlavorgn · Post by **rlavorgn** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:03 pm

The general solution here is missing an integral sign after x2 in the last term

ececconi · Post by **ececconi** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:57 am

Page 74 lines 2-3, 6-7, 10, 16

The bottom of the equation in the integral is not defined as the Wronskian which should be x1*x2dot - x1dot-x2

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:59 pm

typo

somewhat is written twice

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:01 pm

it says that Figure 4.3 is a plot of the solution for wn = 1,2,3,4 and 5, but in Figure 4.3 only wn = 1,2 and 3 are plotted

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:04 pm

w = 5 should be wn=5

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:07 pm

where it says it is from equation 4.8 is should be equation 4.7

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:10 pm

Now consider the problem of a coupled by a spring to a .....

Should be ...of a mass coupled by a spring to a...

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:11 pm

...in the problem is the natural...

should be are the natural

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:12 pm

it should be xp(t) not x double dot p(t)

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:33 pm

the x'(0) equation should be equal to x'o at the end, not x'(0) again

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:38 pm

missing comas:

"function of the forcing frequency, omega and the damping ratio, zeta is not strahgt-forward."

comas are needed after the omega and zeta

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:39 pm

comas needed after the Mhat and phi

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:50 pm

"show that if there is gravity if x is measured..."

should be:

"is gravity and if x is..."

also, no comma is needed after the parenthetical comment

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:15 pm

in the xp(t) equation, i think it should be just phi, not phi-hat. earlier we had combined phi-hat and phi-bar into phi.

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:18 pm

typo

"This is in contrast to the magnitude factor for a an applied force..."

should just be "factor for an applied force"

ececconi · Post by **ececconi** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:47 pm

Page 384, line 2

The equations cuts off at -.56.Sincethat

should be
"
.56

Since that delta"

ececconi · Post by **ececconi** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:52 pm

Page 97 line 12 (or simply equation 4.17)

there should be a dot over the second x, to be in canonical form

ececconi · Post by **ececconi** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:58 pm

page 383 line - 3

the equation should be -2*pi*zeta... instead of -2*pi*z

cknapick · Post by **cknapick** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:50 pm

Page 109
Line 3
"the" typed twice

Luke Nakatsukasa · Post by **Luke Nakatsukasa** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:00 pm

natural frequency: shoule be sqrt(k/m) not k*m

and

damping ratio should have the same k/m in it

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:57 pm

"Its schematics representation" should be "Its schematic representation

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:00 am

Under "Introduction to Numerical Methods"

Obviously I am not an English major, but I think there should be a (.) and capital M here:

"in this book (and any other book, for the matter). " Methods that use...
^ ^

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:01 am

[quote="llechner"]Under "Introduction to Numerical Methods"

Obviously I am not an English major, but I think there should be a (.) and capital M here:

"in this book (and any other book, for the matter). " Methods that use...

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:05 am

top equation... need to multiply second term by "t"

so... x(t) = c1*exp(lamba1*t) + t*c2*exp(lamba2*t)

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:13 am

well... i hope this isn't me being stupid but...

looking at equation 3.15 on page 74 i noticed that the denominator contains the same two terms--subtracted from one another. did you mean to take the derivative of x1(t) in the second term and multiply it by x2(t).

in other words... wouldn't x1(t)*x2dot(t) - x2dot(t)*x1(t) = 0 ?

gonzo · Post by **gonzo** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:25 pm

The y-axis label for Figure 4.16 is not correct. The equation should be the same as the 5th equation on pg. 99, or as shown below:

sqrt( 1/ ((1-(w/wn)^2)^2 + (2*zeta(w/wn))^2))

rlavorgn · Post by **rlavorgn** » Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:29 am

"conceptes" should be spelled "concepts"

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:03 pm

starting should be start

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:04 pm

compute [the] derivative- the is missing

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:05 pm

the word "compute" needs to be removed so it reads "one must resort..."

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:07 pm

Because [of] the form... the word "of" is missing

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:10 pm

but the dependence of x on t... is an incomplete statement. Could read but the dependence of x on t [is not specified] or [is unknown].

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:16 pm

d^2 / dxdt (where d represents the partial of) should be d^2[f]/ dxdt - need to add the "f"

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:18 pm

the first set of terms ((d^2f/dx^2)f + d^2f/dxdt) should be multiplied by f (where d represents the partial of)

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:21 pm

[-20(10x(1-x)) +... should be multiplied by (10x(1-x)). It should read [(-20(10x(1-x)))(10x(1-x)) +...

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:23 pm

a computations does not make any sense- should read "in straight-forward Taylor series computations..."- the "a" should be removed

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:26 pm

[(x^3(t)... is missing a negative sign in front of it. Should read [(-x^3(t)...

irish07 · Post by **irish07** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:28 pm

((x(t) +... is missing a negative sign in front of it. Should read (-(x(t) +...

JLinnema · Post by **JLinnema** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:29 pm

text says "plotting the transmissibility as a function of the frequency ratio for various damping ratios is probably a idea..."

Perhaps it should be "is probably a good idea"?

JLinnema · Post by **JLinnema** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:36 pm

Text says "it makes sense to use that data t either validate..."
t should be to

JLinnema · Post by **JLinnema** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:39 pm

"it does not patter.."
should be "it does not matter"

TonyAshley · Post by **TonyAshley** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:50 pm

In Equation 4.8, the coefficient of sin(omega_n*t), (dot_x/omega_n), should have a 0 subscript on the (dot_x); it should be (dot_x_0/omega_n).

andrelorico · Post by **andrelorico** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:59 pm

on page 135 when it says:

"substituting the series expression into Eqn 5.6 gives"

should be:

"substituting the series expression into Eqn 5.3 gives"

andrelorico · Post by **andrelorico** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 10:07 pm

on page 136, very bottom
conveneient should be convenient.

andrelorico · Post by **andrelorico** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 10:17 pm

on page 138
"A very important properties is" should be "Very important properties of a series are"
"obatin" should be "obtain"
"converngent" should be "convergent"

sdelaure · Post by **sdelaure** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:13 pm

"the argument to the since function" should read "the argument to the sin function"

rlavorgn · Post by **rlavorgn** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:52 pm

There should be an x in the equation for f-hat after the (t2-t1)/L term. At least in the notes this was the case. There is also an x present in the equation form the line before which is missing.

tmalecek · Post by **tmalecek** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:03 am

I believe the equation should finish with sin(2n(pi)t/L) rather than cos since b_n is zero.

tmalecek · Post by **tmalecek** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:05 am

for the last post, the page number applies for the online version of the text as of Nov. 25th, not the printed text.

llechner · Post by **llechner** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:01 am

typo....

forjm >>>> form

mbeaucla · Post by **mbeaucla** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:16 pm

The integrals from -L to L of the sin^2 and cos^2 should be L rather than L/2 when m=n.

mbeaucla · Post by **mbeaucla** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:53 pm

"separation of variables" is written twice

avalenzu · Post by **avalenzu** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:30 pm

In the last line of this equation block, the argument of the second term of the numerator should be 2.0 not 1.5.

dseibel · Post by **dseibel** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:57 pm

"The string is assumed to elastic" should be "The string is assumed to be elastic"

alombar1 · Post by **alombar1** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:00 pm

I believe the answer to example 12.1.3 is incorrect.

the last term in the answer should be sin( ) instead of cos( ) because a_n was solved for.

this may effect the graphs and movies that follow.

mpetrong · Post by **mpetrong** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:03 pm

I think the last sin in u_1(x,t) should be cos.

should be cos(2*pi*t/3).

it seems like the error was carried down too.

dseibel · Post by **dseibel** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:12 pm

pg 417, section 12.3.1, line 1:

"the one dimensional heat conduction equation is give by" should be "the one dimensional heat conduction equation is given by"

pg 417, section 12.3.1, line 5:

"the rate of heat condution" should be "the rate of heat conduction"

pg 418, line 3:

"heat condution from the left" should be "heat conduction from the left"

dseibel · Post by **dseibel** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:17 pm

"determined by expoiting orthogonality as before" should be "determined by exploiting orthogonality as before"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:36 pm

"other two functions have a the same sign"

should be

"have the same sign"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:38 pm

"temperature profile has a nonzero, there will..."

should be

"has a nonzero curvature"

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:40 pm

the paragraph says that higher heat conduction takes place at a steeper slope on the plot. The steeper slope is from center to the right, but the paragraph also says the most heat conduction will take place from the left side to the center. This doesn't agree

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:43 pm

The equation contains both lambda and x in the sqrts. But only lambda should be

X(x) = c1*sin(sqrt(lambda)*x) + c2*cos(sqrt(lambda)*x)

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:44 pm

the infinity sign should be on top of the sigmas, not beside it

mbeaucla · Post by **mbeaucla** » Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:43 am

"A" beginning the sentence doesn't make sense.

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:49 pm

in 12.3.3
equation for f.hat(x) should have the "x" carry down from the previous equation.

F.hat(x) = f(x) - (T2 - T1)*x/L - T1

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am

typo

"systems of two first order, linear, homogeneous differential equation."

equation should be equations

shockett · Post by **shockett** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:52 am

typo

"it may simply be referred to a a or the differential equation"

should be

"... referred to AS a or the..."