As Victor says:
I am confident that the system
x′=−y+(x2+y2)x,
y′=x+(x2+y2)y
has the origin repelling nearby trajectories, while
x′=−y−(x2+y2)x,
y′=x−(x2+y2)y
has the origin attracting nearby trajectories, and
x′=−y
y′=x
has just periodic orbits near the origin. But all three
linearize to the same thing at the origin,
left( begin{array}{rr} 0 & -1 \ 1 & 0 end{array} right) .
with eigenvalues pmi.
EDIT: Indeed, given a constant real number lambda and system
x′=−y+lambda(x2+y2)x,
y′=x+lambda(x2+y2)y,
we find that
fracddt;(x2+y2)=4lambda(x2+y2)2.
EDIT some more: so, for the nonconstant paths, if we set time to 0 when the trajectory crosses the unit circle, we get
x2+y2=frac11−4lambdat
showing that when lambda>0 the path reaches infinite radius in finite time, while with
lambda<0 the path spirals in to the origin, as expected.
Then, if we set x=rcostheta,;y=rsintheta
as usual, the rate of change of theta does not depend on lambda and foralllambda,t we have
fracdthetadt=1.
No comments:
Post a Comment