Stability VS orbital stability in ODEs












2












$begingroup$


Let $dot x=f(x)$ and ODE.




We say that $x$ is a stable solution if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t for all solution $y(t)$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-y(t_0)|<delta implies |x(t)-y(t)|<varepsilon .$




Let $Phi_t$ denote the flow of the ODE, i.e. $x(t)=Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)$ for $x(t)$ is a solution.




We say that $x$ is orbitaly stable if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t. for all $xi$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-Phi^{t_0,0}(xi)|<delta implies text{dist}(mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0),Phi^{t,t_0}(xi))<varepsilon $ where $mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0)={Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)mid tgeq t_0}$.




I see what is an stable solution, but I can't see what is an orbitaly stable solution. I don't really understand the example. Could someone explain ?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    Let $dot x=f(x)$ and ODE.




    We say that $x$ is a stable solution if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t for all solution $y(t)$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-y(t_0)|<delta implies |x(t)-y(t)|<varepsilon .$




    Let $Phi_t$ denote the flow of the ODE, i.e. $x(t)=Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)$ for $x(t)$ is a solution.




    We say that $x$ is orbitaly stable if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t. for all $xi$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-Phi^{t_0,0}(xi)|<delta implies text{dist}(mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0),Phi^{t,t_0}(xi))<varepsilon $ where $mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0)={Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)mid tgeq t_0}$.




    I see what is an stable solution, but I can't see what is an orbitaly stable solution. I don't really understand the example. Could someone explain ?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2


      1



      $begingroup$


      Let $dot x=f(x)$ and ODE.




      We say that $x$ is a stable solution if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t for all solution $y(t)$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-y(t_0)|<delta implies |x(t)-y(t)|<varepsilon .$




      Let $Phi_t$ denote the flow of the ODE, i.e. $x(t)=Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)$ for $x(t)$ is a solution.




      We say that $x$ is orbitaly stable if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t. for all $xi$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-Phi^{t_0,0}(xi)|<delta implies text{dist}(mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0),Phi^{t,t_0}(xi))<varepsilon $ where $mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0)={Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)mid tgeq t_0}$.




      I see what is an stable solution, but I can't see what is an orbitaly stable solution. I don't really understand the example. Could someone explain ?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Let $dot x=f(x)$ and ODE.




      We say that $x$ is a stable solution if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t for all solution $y(t)$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-y(t_0)|<delta implies |x(t)-y(t)|<varepsilon .$




      Let $Phi_t$ denote the flow of the ODE, i.e. $x(t)=Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)$ for $x(t)$ is a solution.




      We say that $x$ is orbitaly stable if $forall varepsilon >0$, $exists delta >0$ s.t. for all $xi$ s.t. $|x(t_0)-Phi^{t_0,0}(xi)|<delta implies text{dist}(mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0),Phi^{t,t_0}(xi))<varepsilon $ where $mathcal O^+(x_0,t_0)={Phi^{t,t_0}(x_0)mid tgeq t_0}$.




      I see what is an stable solution, but I can't see what is an orbitaly stable solution. I don't really understand the example. Could someone explain ?







      real-analysis ordinary-differential-equations






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 16 '18 at 13:44









      NewMathNewMath

      4059




      4059






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          To understand the difference you need first carefully understand the difference between the integral curves, which are the graph of solutions in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^n$ and orbits, which are the images of the solutions in $mathbb R^n$ parametrized by the time $t$.



          For instance, take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-x.
          $$

          Clearly your solutions will be
          $$
          x(t)=C cos t,quad y(t)= Csin t
          $$

          and you should sketch the corresponding graphs in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^2=mathbb R^3$ and convince yourself that all the solutions are stable.



          Now, the orbits are given by
          $$
          x^2+y^2=C^2,
          $$

          which are circles, and it should be clear that each orbit starting close to another one stays close for any $t$, hence they are also orbitally stable.



          Now take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-sin x.
          $$

          The orbits will look almost the same (and since you are discussing orbital stability you should be able to sketch a phase portrait of this seen-in-any-texbook system), and therefore the corresponding solutions are orbitally stable. It is also well known (but not elementary to show) that each solution has its own period (depending on the initial conditions, this is a general property of nonlinear oscillators). This means that if you take two sufficiently close initial conditions the corresponding integral curves, given enough time, will part sufficiently far from each other and hence are not stable.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 18 '18 at 9:52










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
            $endgroup$
            – Artem
            Dec 18 '18 at 13:43



















          3












          $begingroup$

          Removing the orbit from the definition for orbitally stable gives




          We say that x is orbitaly stable if $∀ε>0$, $∃δ>0$ s.t for any solution $y(t)$ with $∥x(t_0)−y(t_0)∥<δ$ it holds that for all $t>t_0$ there is some $s>t_0$ so that $∥x(s)−y(t)∥<ε$.




          The distance in the second definition is to the curve, the set of points on the trajectory of $x$, not to a specific point on the path as in the first definition.





          Take as example $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ in polar coordinates, that is, with $r=sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}$
          $$dot x_1 = -rx_2+(1-r^2)x_1,\ dot x_2=~~~rx_1+(1-r^2)x_2,$$ with the closed loop solution $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))=(cos t,sin t)$. The general solution is given by
          begin{align}
          %frac{d}{dt}r(t)^{-2}&=2(1-r(t)^{-2})implies (r(t)^{-2}-1)=e^{-2t}(r_0^{-2}-1)\
          r(t)&=frac{r_0}{sqrt{r_0^2+e^{-2t}(1-r_0^2)}}
          =frac{r_0e^t}{sqrt{r_0^2(e^{2t}-1)+1}}
          end{align}

          and
          $$
          θ(t)
          %=int_0^tfrac{d(r_0e^t)}{sqrt{(r_0^2e^t)^2-r_0^2+1}}
          =t+lnleft(r_0+sqrt{e^{-2t}+r_0^2(1-e^{-2t})}right)-ln(r_0+1)
          $$

          While the orbit starting at $r(0)=r_0=x_{1,0}$, $θ(0)=0$ (with $x_{2,0}=0$) converges visually to the limit cycle, the angle evolution is initially very different from the unit speed on the limit cycle. Asymptotically $θ(t)sim t+ln(2r_0)-ln(r_0+1)$, so that the angle difference stabilizes, but does not go to zero.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:23






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:43










          • $begingroup$
            You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:56












          • $begingroup$
            Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 15:23











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3042618%2fstability-vs-orbital-stability-in-odes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          To understand the difference you need first carefully understand the difference between the integral curves, which are the graph of solutions in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^n$ and orbits, which are the images of the solutions in $mathbb R^n$ parametrized by the time $t$.



          For instance, take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-x.
          $$

          Clearly your solutions will be
          $$
          x(t)=C cos t,quad y(t)= Csin t
          $$

          and you should sketch the corresponding graphs in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^2=mathbb R^3$ and convince yourself that all the solutions are stable.



          Now, the orbits are given by
          $$
          x^2+y^2=C^2,
          $$

          which are circles, and it should be clear that each orbit starting close to another one stays close for any $t$, hence they are also orbitally stable.



          Now take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-sin x.
          $$

          The orbits will look almost the same (and since you are discussing orbital stability you should be able to sketch a phase portrait of this seen-in-any-texbook system), and therefore the corresponding solutions are orbitally stable. It is also well known (but not elementary to show) that each solution has its own period (depending on the initial conditions, this is a general property of nonlinear oscillators). This means that if you take two sufficiently close initial conditions the corresponding integral curves, given enough time, will part sufficiently far from each other and hence are not stable.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 18 '18 at 9:52










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
            $endgroup$
            – Artem
            Dec 18 '18 at 13:43
















          2












          $begingroup$

          To understand the difference you need first carefully understand the difference between the integral curves, which are the graph of solutions in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^n$ and orbits, which are the images of the solutions in $mathbb R^n$ parametrized by the time $t$.



          For instance, take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-x.
          $$

          Clearly your solutions will be
          $$
          x(t)=C cos t,quad y(t)= Csin t
          $$

          and you should sketch the corresponding graphs in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^2=mathbb R^3$ and convince yourself that all the solutions are stable.



          Now, the orbits are given by
          $$
          x^2+y^2=C^2,
          $$

          which are circles, and it should be clear that each orbit starting close to another one stays close for any $t$, hence they are also orbitally stable.



          Now take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-sin x.
          $$

          The orbits will look almost the same (and since you are discussing orbital stability you should be able to sketch a phase portrait of this seen-in-any-texbook system), and therefore the corresponding solutions are orbitally stable. It is also well known (but not elementary to show) that each solution has its own period (depending on the initial conditions, this is a general property of nonlinear oscillators). This means that if you take two sufficiently close initial conditions the corresponding integral curves, given enough time, will part sufficiently far from each other and hence are not stable.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 18 '18 at 9:52










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
            $endgroup$
            – Artem
            Dec 18 '18 at 13:43














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          To understand the difference you need first carefully understand the difference between the integral curves, which are the graph of solutions in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^n$ and orbits, which are the images of the solutions in $mathbb R^n$ parametrized by the time $t$.



          For instance, take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-x.
          $$

          Clearly your solutions will be
          $$
          x(t)=C cos t,quad y(t)= Csin t
          $$

          and you should sketch the corresponding graphs in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^2=mathbb R^3$ and convince yourself that all the solutions are stable.



          Now, the orbits are given by
          $$
          x^2+y^2=C^2,
          $$

          which are circles, and it should be clear that each orbit starting close to another one stays close for any $t$, hence they are also orbitally stable.



          Now take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-sin x.
          $$

          The orbits will look almost the same (and since you are discussing orbital stability you should be able to sketch a phase portrait of this seen-in-any-texbook system), and therefore the corresponding solutions are orbitally stable. It is also well known (but not elementary to show) that each solution has its own period (depending on the initial conditions, this is a general property of nonlinear oscillators). This means that if you take two sufficiently close initial conditions the corresponding integral curves, given enough time, will part sufficiently far from each other and hence are not stable.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          To understand the difference you need first carefully understand the difference between the integral curves, which are the graph of solutions in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^n$ and orbits, which are the images of the solutions in $mathbb R^n$ parametrized by the time $t$.



          For instance, take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-x.
          $$

          Clearly your solutions will be
          $$
          x(t)=C cos t,quad y(t)= Csin t
          $$

          and you should sketch the corresponding graphs in $mathbb Rtimes mathbb R^2=mathbb R^3$ and convince yourself that all the solutions are stable.



          Now, the orbits are given by
          $$
          x^2+y^2=C^2,
          $$

          which are circles, and it should be clear that each orbit starting close to another one stays close for any $t$, hence they are also orbitally stable.



          Now take
          $$
          dot x=y,\
          dot y=-sin x.
          $$

          The orbits will look almost the same (and since you are discussing orbital stability you should be able to sketch a phase portrait of this seen-in-any-texbook system), and therefore the corresponding solutions are orbitally stable. It is also well known (but not elementary to show) that each solution has its own period (depending on the initial conditions, this is a general property of nonlinear oscillators). This means that if you take two sufficiently close initial conditions the corresponding integral curves, given enough time, will part sufficiently far from each other and hence are not stable.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 18 '18 at 1:35









          ArtemArtem

          11.5k32245




          11.5k32245












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 18 '18 at 9:52










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
            $endgroup$
            – Artem
            Dec 18 '18 at 13:43


















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 18 '18 at 9:52










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
            $endgroup$
            – Artem
            Dec 18 '18 at 13:43
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 18 '18 at 9:52




          $begingroup$
          Thank you for your answer. At the end, can we say that stability $implies $ orbit stability, but the converse is not true ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 18 '18 at 9:52












          $begingroup$
          Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
          $endgroup$
          – Artem
          Dec 18 '18 at 13:43




          $begingroup$
          Yes, and this is the reason to introduce new stability concept since the (Lyapunov) stability is quite demanding on the solutions.
          $endgroup$
          – Artem
          Dec 18 '18 at 13:43











          3












          $begingroup$

          Removing the orbit from the definition for orbitally stable gives




          We say that x is orbitaly stable if $∀ε>0$, $∃δ>0$ s.t for any solution $y(t)$ with $∥x(t_0)−y(t_0)∥<δ$ it holds that for all $t>t_0$ there is some $s>t_0$ so that $∥x(s)−y(t)∥<ε$.




          The distance in the second definition is to the curve, the set of points on the trajectory of $x$, not to a specific point on the path as in the first definition.





          Take as example $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ in polar coordinates, that is, with $r=sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}$
          $$dot x_1 = -rx_2+(1-r^2)x_1,\ dot x_2=~~~rx_1+(1-r^2)x_2,$$ with the closed loop solution $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))=(cos t,sin t)$. The general solution is given by
          begin{align}
          %frac{d}{dt}r(t)^{-2}&=2(1-r(t)^{-2})implies (r(t)^{-2}-1)=e^{-2t}(r_0^{-2}-1)\
          r(t)&=frac{r_0}{sqrt{r_0^2+e^{-2t}(1-r_0^2)}}
          =frac{r_0e^t}{sqrt{r_0^2(e^{2t}-1)+1}}
          end{align}

          and
          $$
          θ(t)
          %=int_0^tfrac{d(r_0e^t)}{sqrt{(r_0^2e^t)^2-r_0^2+1}}
          =t+lnleft(r_0+sqrt{e^{-2t}+r_0^2(1-e^{-2t})}right)-ln(r_0+1)
          $$

          While the orbit starting at $r(0)=r_0=x_{1,0}$, $θ(0)=0$ (with $x_{2,0}=0$) converges visually to the limit cycle, the angle evolution is initially very different from the unit speed on the limit cycle. Asymptotically $θ(t)sim t+ln(2r_0)-ln(r_0+1)$, so that the angle difference stabilizes, but does not go to zero.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:23






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:43










          • $begingroup$
            You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:56












          • $begingroup$
            Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 15:23
















          3












          $begingroup$

          Removing the orbit from the definition for orbitally stable gives




          We say that x is orbitaly stable if $∀ε>0$, $∃δ>0$ s.t for any solution $y(t)$ with $∥x(t_0)−y(t_0)∥<δ$ it holds that for all $t>t_0$ there is some $s>t_0$ so that $∥x(s)−y(t)∥<ε$.




          The distance in the second definition is to the curve, the set of points on the trajectory of $x$, not to a specific point on the path as in the first definition.





          Take as example $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ in polar coordinates, that is, with $r=sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}$
          $$dot x_1 = -rx_2+(1-r^2)x_1,\ dot x_2=~~~rx_1+(1-r^2)x_2,$$ with the closed loop solution $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))=(cos t,sin t)$. The general solution is given by
          begin{align}
          %frac{d}{dt}r(t)^{-2}&=2(1-r(t)^{-2})implies (r(t)^{-2}-1)=e^{-2t}(r_0^{-2}-1)\
          r(t)&=frac{r_0}{sqrt{r_0^2+e^{-2t}(1-r_0^2)}}
          =frac{r_0e^t}{sqrt{r_0^2(e^{2t}-1)+1}}
          end{align}

          and
          $$
          θ(t)
          %=int_0^tfrac{d(r_0e^t)}{sqrt{(r_0^2e^t)^2-r_0^2+1}}
          =t+lnleft(r_0+sqrt{e^{-2t}+r_0^2(1-e^{-2t})}right)-ln(r_0+1)
          $$

          While the orbit starting at $r(0)=r_0=x_{1,0}$, $θ(0)=0$ (with $x_{2,0}=0$) converges visually to the limit cycle, the angle evolution is initially very different from the unit speed on the limit cycle. Asymptotically $θ(t)sim t+ln(2r_0)-ln(r_0+1)$, so that the angle difference stabilizes, but does not go to zero.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:23






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:43










          • $begingroup$
            You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:56












          • $begingroup$
            Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 15:23














          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          Removing the orbit from the definition for orbitally stable gives




          We say that x is orbitaly stable if $∀ε>0$, $∃δ>0$ s.t for any solution $y(t)$ with $∥x(t_0)−y(t_0)∥<δ$ it holds that for all $t>t_0$ there is some $s>t_0$ so that $∥x(s)−y(t)∥<ε$.




          The distance in the second definition is to the curve, the set of points on the trajectory of $x$, not to a specific point on the path as in the first definition.





          Take as example $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ in polar coordinates, that is, with $r=sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}$
          $$dot x_1 = -rx_2+(1-r^2)x_1,\ dot x_2=~~~rx_1+(1-r^2)x_2,$$ with the closed loop solution $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))=(cos t,sin t)$. The general solution is given by
          begin{align}
          %frac{d}{dt}r(t)^{-2}&=2(1-r(t)^{-2})implies (r(t)^{-2}-1)=e^{-2t}(r_0^{-2}-1)\
          r(t)&=frac{r_0}{sqrt{r_0^2+e^{-2t}(1-r_0^2)}}
          =frac{r_0e^t}{sqrt{r_0^2(e^{2t}-1)+1}}
          end{align}

          and
          $$
          θ(t)
          %=int_0^tfrac{d(r_0e^t)}{sqrt{(r_0^2e^t)^2-r_0^2+1}}
          =t+lnleft(r_0+sqrt{e^{-2t}+r_0^2(1-e^{-2t})}right)-ln(r_0+1)
          $$

          While the orbit starting at $r(0)=r_0=x_{1,0}$, $θ(0)=0$ (with $x_{2,0}=0$) converges visually to the limit cycle, the angle evolution is initially very different from the unit speed on the limit cycle. Asymptotically $θ(t)sim t+ln(2r_0)-ln(r_0+1)$, so that the angle difference stabilizes, but does not go to zero.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Removing the orbit from the definition for orbitally stable gives




          We say that x is orbitaly stable if $∀ε>0$, $∃δ>0$ s.t for any solution $y(t)$ with $∥x(t_0)−y(t_0)∥<δ$ it holds that for all $t>t_0$ there is some $s>t_0$ so that $∥x(s)−y(t)∥<ε$.




          The distance in the second definition is to the curve, the set of points on the trajectory of $x$, not to a specific point on the path as in the first definition.





          Take as example $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ in polar coordinates, that is, with $r=sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}$
          $$dot x_1 = -rx_2+(1-r^2)x_1,\ dot x_2=~~~rx_1+(1-r^2)x_2,$$ with the closed loop solution $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))=(cos t,sin t)$. The general solution is given by
          begin{align}
          %frac{d}{dt}r(t)^{-2}&=2(1-r(t)^{-2})implies (r(t)^{-2}-1)=e^{-2t}(r_0^{-2}-1)\
          r(t)&=frac{r_0}{sqrt{r_0^2+e^{-2t}(1-r_0^2)}}
          =frac{r_0e^t}{sqrt{r_0^2(e^{2t}-1)+1}}
          end{align}

          and
          $$
          θ(t)
          %=int_0^tfrac{d(r_0e^t)}{sqrt{(r_0^2e^t)^2-r_0^2+1}}
          =t+lnleft(r_0+sqrt{e^{-2t}+r_0^2(1-e^{-2t})}right)-ln(r_0+1)
          $$

          While the orbit starting at $r(0)=r_0=x_{1,0}$, $θ(0)=0$ (with $x_{2,0}=0$) converges visually to the limit cycle, the angle evolution is initially very different from the unit speed on the limit cycle. Asymptotically $θ(t)sim t+ln(2r_0)-ln(r_0+1)$, so that the angle difference stabilizes, but does not go to zero.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 16 '18 at 15:52

























          answered Dec 16 '18 at 14:18









          LutzLLutzL

          58.8k42056




          58.8k42056












          • $begingroup$
            What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:23






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:43










          • $begingroup$
            You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:56












          • $begingroup$
            Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 15:23


















          • $begingroup$
            What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:23






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:43










          • $begingroup$
            You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
            $endgroup$
            – NewMath
            Dec 16 '18 at 14:56












          • $begingroup$
            Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
            $endgroup$
            – LutzL
            Dec 16 '18 at 15:23
















          $begingroup$
          What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:23




          $begingroup$
          What does it mean graphically ? (because as written, I don't really see how it look). Do you know where I can find an example ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:23




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
          $endgroup$
          – LutzL
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:43




          $begingroup$
          Suppose $x$ is a closed loop, a stable limit cycle, like in $dot r = r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta=r$ the solution $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$. Then any other solution converging to it will have a slightly different angular speed, thus while it comes closer to the orbit, the points of same times run away from each other.
          $endgroup$
          – LutzL
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:43












          $begingroup$
          You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:56






          $begingroup$
          You mix to much thing, sorry I'm not confortable at all with all this. You say "$x$ a closed loop", then you introduce $(x,y)=(cos t,sin t)$, is it the same $x$ as before ? And to finish, what is the relation between $dot r=r(1-r^2)$, $dot theta =r$ and $x$, and $(cos t,sin t)$ ?
          $endgroup$
          – NewMath
          Dec 16 '18 at 14:56














          $begingroup$
          Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
          $endgroup$
          – LutzL
          Dec 16 '18 at 15:23




          $begingroup$
          Yes, should have been $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t))$. $(r,θ)$ are the polar coordinates of $x$, or just consider $θ$ modulo $2pi$.
          $endgroup$
          – LutzL
          Dec 16 '18 at 15:23


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3042618%2fstability-vs-orbital-stability-in-odes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          How do I know what Microsoft account the skydrive app is syncing to?

          When does type information flow backwards in C++?

          Grease: Live!