3.1 Reformulations of the ODE [022U]
Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.
Complete original source context · Original author HTML
3.1 Reformulations of the ODE
First reformulation of the ODE
The ODE (7) can be somewhat further simplified:
Lemma 3.1.
Under the substitution , the ODE (7) is equivalent to
|
|
|
(10) |
Proof.
Observe
|
|
|
We can rewrite the ODE (7) as
|
|
|
Now
|
|
|
so the ODE simplifies to (10) after slightly modifying the constant.
∎
Remark 3.2.
The Kähler condition (cf. Remark 2.5) translates into
|
|
|
Remark 3.3.
The symmetry of the ODE (cf. Remark 2.6) translates into the following. Let
|
|
|
then
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus if solves (10), then so does .
In terms of the substitution , the boundary condition at becomes
|
|
|
(11) |
In the normalization of the ODE
|
|
|
(12) |
we would have
|
|
|
Notice determines , which means this boundary condition at comes in a 1-parameter family, instead of the generic 2-parameter family for second order ODEs. The end has a closely related boundary condition via the ODE symmetry (cf. Remark 3.3), which also arises in a 1-parameter family, so one expects the global solutions to the ODE to be isolated.
Second reformulation of the ODE
We write for ,
|
|
|
(13) |
Then
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus the ODE (12) can be reformulated as
|
|
|
(14) |
The Kähler condition (cf. Remark 3.2) translates into
|
|
|
(15) |
The initial condition at is
|
|
|
(16) |