This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 18.03 Problem Set 2 Spring 2009 Due in boxes at Room 2-106, 12:55 pm, Friday, Feb 13 Part A (16 points) (at due date) Write the names of any person, web site, or materials you consulted. Write No C (no consultation) on your paper if you consulted no outside materials/people. Lec 2, Fri, Feb 5 Read: EP 6.1, 6.2 Work 1C-4. Lec 3, Mon, Feb 8 Read: EP 1.5 Work: EP 1.5/1, 2, 38; 1D-4 (use 1 = 1, 2 = 2 in both parts) Lec 4, Wed, Feb 10 Read: EP 1.6 Work: EP 1.5: 5, 13; 1B-5a, 9a Part B (32 points) 1. (Lec 2, Fri, Feb 5) [8pts: 2 + 1 + 3 + 2] a) The solution to y = y with y (0) = 1 is y = e x . What is the Euler approximation to y (1) = e with n equal steps? First fix n , and find y k , k = 0 , 1 , 2 , . . . to see the pattern. b) Explain, using y , whether the approximation is larger/smaller than the exact answer. (You can also see it at DAIMP, if you wish.) c) Use the math.mit.edu/daimp Eulers Method to study y = y 2- x . Find the solution to y = y 2- x with initial condition y (0) =- . 40 using Eulers method with step sizes h . Make a table with five column headings, namely, h , the estimated value of y est (1) (including actual value, which correponds to h = 0), error E , E/h , and E/h 2 . Does your table support the claim that the error is approximately proportional to h ? d) Turn in two separate printouts showing two ways the numerical approximation can go wrong. The first way is that the long term behavior is nothing like the true limit. The second way is that two numerical solutions...
View Full Document
- Spring '09