Timeline for Asymptotic solution for a first order ODE
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2018 at 13:05 | comment | added | Willie Wong | @Mor: I will just apologize in advance that I don't think I will find the time to think too much about it. But if something occurs to me I'll of course edit. | |
| Sep 13, 2018 at 11:13 | comment | added | Mor | @WillieWong Thank you for the answer. Please let me know if you find a way to prove the remaining case (which is indeed the case I'm really interested in). | |
| Sep 10, 2018 at 6:54 | comment | added | Daniel Soudry | Ah, yes. Sorry, I misunderstood your previous comment (I thought it explained why you used $r < s$ instead of $r \leq s$). | |
| Sep 10, 2018 at 1:08 | comment | added | Willie Wong | @DanielSoudry: see my previous comment? (I don't need $r < s$; it is that for the construction only the $r < s$ case is needed.) | |
| Sep 8, 2018 at 12:39 | comment | added | Daniel Soudry | @WillieWong: Sorry if I'm missing something obvious: where and why do we need to use $r<s$ exactly? Wouldn't the next lines (e.g., the first equation stated after the condition) also hold if $r>s$? | |
| Sep 4, 2018 at 14:50 | comment | added | Willie Wong | @Mor: just my personal laziness. (I didn't want to have to type $\leq$ everywhere, and the function involved in strictly convex, so I can get away without $\leq$ if I rule out $r = s$. So instead of $r \neq s$ I typed $r < s$, which happens to be true for the case we need.) | |
| Sep 1, 2018 at 11:06 | comment | added | Mor | Thank you! Nice proof. One question - why do you need $r<s$? | |
| Sep 1, 2018 at 10:48 | vote | accept | Mor | ||
| Aug 31, 2018 at 14:08 | history | edited | Willie Wong | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Aug 31, 2018 at 13:50 | history | answered | Willie Wong | CC BY-SA 4.0 |