Introduction
The heat equation and
the wave equation were each
introduced with a promise that the present page now redeems. The classical
trichotomy of linear second-order PDEs (parabolic, hyperbolic, elliptic) has a third
member, the Laplace equation, and we committed to developing it in a subsequent
page.
To present that third member as another point on the same axis, however, would be
misleading. Heat and wave are initial-value problems in time. At
\(t = 0\) something is prescribed, and the equation propagates it forward,
parabolically in the heat case and hyperbolically in the wave case. The Laplace
equation has no time variable. The problem it solves is structurally different, and
the time axis along which heat and wave were arrayed is replaced here by the spatial
boundary. Given values of \(u\) on the boundary \(\partial\Omega\) of a spatial
region, what is \(u\) inside?
A second characterization stands alongside the first. Setting the time derivative of
the heat equation to zero, or both time derivatives of the wave equation to zero,
reduces each equation to a single common form:
\[
\Delta u = \partial_{xx} u + \partial_{yy} u = 0.
\]
The Laplace equation is the time-evolution endpoint of the other two classical PDEs.
It is the steady state to which a heat distribution settles after long time, and the
equation satisfied by a vibrating string at rest.
The same equation arises in physics whenever an equilibrium of a diffusive or
elastic medium is sought: the electrostatic potential in a region free of charge,
the shape of a soap film stretched across a wire frame. The solutions of
\(\Delta u = 0\), called harmonic functions, are the static,
equilibrium analogues of the dynamical objects studied in the heat and wave pages.
A third characterization, the most analytic of the three, asks what controls the
solution. For the heat equation, the maximum principle gives
\[
\inf f \leq u(x, t) \leq \sup f
\]
for every \(x\) and every \(t \gt 0\). The solution is bounded at every point and
every time by the extremes of the initial data. For the wave equation, no such
\(L^\infty\) bound by the initial data exists. The conserved quantity is the global
mechanical energy, an integral invariant rather than a sup/inf estimate. For the
Laplace equation, as the present page will prove, a bound by the data extremes
returns
\[
\min_{\partial\Omega} u \leq u(x) \leq \max_{\partial\Omega} u
\]
but with the controlling data shifted from the time-zero slice to the spatial
boundary.
The three classical PDEs answer two related questions. The first is which data
determine the solution, and the answer is initial data for heat and wave,
boundary data for Laplace. The second is what controlling quantity governs its
size: pointwise sup/inf bound by the data extremes in the parabolic and
elliptic cases, an integral energy invariant in the hyperbolic case.
Laplace Equation on the Disk
The first concrete setting in which we solve the Laplace equation is the unit disk
\(D = \{(x, y) : x^2 + y^2 \lt 1\}\) with boundary \(\partial D\) the unit circle.
The Dirichlet problem on \(D\) prescribes the values of \(u\) on
\(\partial D\) and asks for the harmonic extension into the interior:
\[
\begin{cases}
\Delta u(x, y) = 0, & (x, y) \in D, \\\\
u(x, y) = f(x, y), & (x, y) \in \partial D,
\end{cases}
\]
where \(f\) is a prescribed continuous function on the unit circle.
The structural parallel with the heat and wave equations on the bounded interval is
direct. In each case a second-order linear PDE is supplemented with data on the
boundary of the spatial domain. The difference is the absence of a time variable and
the absence of initial data. What was a one-dimensional spatial domain \((0, L)\)
with two endpoint conditions is now a two-dimensional spatial domain \(D\) with a
one-dimensional boundary \(\partial D\) carrying a full continuum of conditions. The
natural choice of coordinates is polar.
Polar Coordinates and Separation of Variables
Setting \(x = r\cos\theta\) and \(y = r\sin\theta\) with \(r \in [0, 1]\) and
\(\theta \in [-\pi, \pi]\), a direct chain-rule computation rewrites the Laplacian
in the form
\[
\Delta u
=
\partial_{rr} u + \frac{1}{r}\partial_r u + \frac{1}{r^2}\partial_{\theta\theta} u.
\]
The Dirichlet problem becomes
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_{rr} u + \dfrac{1}{r}\partial_r u + \dfrac{1}{r^2}\partial_{\theta\theta} u = 0,
& 0 \lt r \lt 1,\ -\pi \lt \theta \leq \pi, \\\\
u(1, \theta) = f(\theta), & -\pi \lt \theta \leq \pi,
\end{cases}
\]
where, with a slight abuse of notation, \(f(\theta)\) denotes the boundary datum as
a function on the circle and is assumed continuous and \(2\pi\)-periodic in
\(\theta\).
Following the technique used for the heat equation on the bounded interval, we seek
separated solutions
\[
u(r, \theta) = R(r)\, \Theta(\theta).
\]
Substituting into the polar Laplace equation and multiplying through by
\(r^2 / \bigl(R(r)\,\Theta(\theta)\bigr)\), valid wherever neither factor vanishes,
separates the variables:
\[
\frac{r^2 R''(r) + r R'(r)}{R(r)}
=
-\frac{\Theta''(\theta)}{\Theta(\theta)}.
\]
The left-hand side depends only on \(r\), the right only on \(\theta\). Both must
equal a common constant, which we denote \(\lambda\). The Dirichlet problem on the
disk thus splits into a pair of ordinary differential equations coupled through the
spectral parameter \(\lambda\):
\[
\begin{align*}
\Theta''(\theta) + \lambda\, \Theta(\theta) &= 0, \\\\
r^2 R''(r) + r R'(r) - \lambda\, R(r) &= 0.
\end{align*}
\]
The Angular Eigenvalue Problem
The angular equation \(\Theta'' + \lambda \Theta = 0\) is the same eigenvalue ODE
that arose in the heat equation on the bounded interval, but the boundary conditions
are different. There \(\Theta\) was required to vanish at two endpoints of an
interval. Here \(\theta\) parametrizes a closed curve, and \(\Theta\) must instead
be \(2\pi\)-periodic:
\[
\Theta(\theta + 2\pi) = \Theta(\theta)
\quad \text{for all } \theta \in \mathbb{R}.
\]
This periodicity replaces the case analysis on the sign of \(\lambda\) that the
Dirichlet endpoint conditions required. For \(\lambda \lt 0\), the general solution
\[
\Theta(\theta) = c_1 e^{\sqrt{-\lambda}\,\theta} + c_2 e^{-\sqrt{-\lambda}\,\theta}
\]
grows or decays exponentially and admits no nontrivial periodic representative. For
\(\lambda = 0\),
\[
\Theta(\theta) = c_1 + c_2\theta
\]
is periodic only when \(c_2 = 0\), giving the constant solution \(\Theta_0 = 1\).
For \(\lambda \gt 0\), the general solution
\[
\Theta(\theta) = c_1 \cos\sqrt{\lambda}\,\theta + c_2 \sin\sqrt{\lambda}\,\theta
\]
is \(2\pi\)-periodic if and only if \(\sqrt{\lambda}\) is a positive integer. The
eigenvalues are therefore
\[
\lambda_n = n^2, \quad n \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\},
\]
with corresponding two-dimensional eigenspaces spanned by
\(\{\cos n\theta, \sin n\theta\}\) for \(n \geq 1\) (or, in complex form, by
\(e^{in\theta}\) and \(e^{-in\theta}\)) and one-dimensional for \(n = 0\) (spanned
by the constant).
Combining the positive and negative integer indices into a single signed parameter,
we record the angular eigenfunctions in complex form as
\[
\Theta_n(\theta) = e^{-in\theta}, \quad n \in \mathbb{Z}.
\]
The Radial Equation
With \(\lambda = n^2\) determined, the radial equation becomes
\[
r^2 R''(r) + r R'(r) - n^2 R(r) = 0.
\]
This is the Cauchy-Euler equation, whose general solution is
obtained by trying \(R(r) = r^\alpha\). Substitution yields
\(\alpha(\alpha - 1) + \alpha - n^2 = \alpha^2 - n^2 = 0\), so \(\alpha = \pm n\)
for \(n \geq 1\). The general solution is
\[
R_n(r) = A_n\, r^{n} + B_n\, r^{-n}
\quad (n \geq 1),
\]
with the degenerate case \(n = 0\) handled separately. The radial equation
\(r^2 R'' + r R' = 0\) factors as \(r \cdot (r R')' = 0\), so on \(r \gt 0\) we have
\((r R')' = 0\). This gives \(r R'(r) = B_0\) constant and hence
\(R_0(r) = A_0 + B_0 \log r\).
In both cases, one of the two basis solutions is singular as \(r \to 0^+\). The
factor \(r^{-n}\) blows up for \(n \geq 1\), and \(\log r\) diverges to \(-\infty\)
for \(n = 0\). We seek bounded harmonic functions on the entire open disk, including
the origin. This regularity requirement forces \(B_n = 0\) for every \(n \geq 0\),
leaving
\[
R_n(r) = A_n\, r^{|n|}, \quad n \in \mathbb{Z},
\]
where the absolute value covers the negative-index case uniformly (the radial factor
depends on \(|n|\) only, while the angular factor distinguishes \(n\) from \(-n\)).
The Series Solution
The product solutions \(R_n(r)\, \Theta_n(\theta) = r^{|n|} e^{-in\theta}\) are each
harmonic on the disk. By superposition, any convergent series of the form
\[
u(r, \theta) = \sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} c_n\, r^{|n|}\, e^{-in\theta}
\]
formally satisfies the Laplace equation. The remaining task is to choose the
coefficients \(c_n\) so that the boundary condition \(u(1, \theta) = f(\theta)\)
holds. Setting \(r = 1\) gives
\[
f(\theta) = \sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} c_n\, e^{-in\theta},
\]
which is precisely the
complex Fourier series
of the boundary datum \(f\). The coefficients are therefore the Fourier coefficients
\[
c_n = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(\phi)\, e^{+in\phi}\, d\phi.
\]
The boundary datum is decomposed into angular modes \(e^{in\phi}\), and each mode is
propagated into the interior by the radial damping factor \(r^{|n|}\), which decays
geometrically as \(r\) moves inward from the boundary at \(r = 1\) toward the
origin. This is the structural mechanism of the disk Dirichlet problem.
High-frequency boundary oscillations are damped most strongly toward the interior,
while low-frequency modes persist deeper into the disk. The factor \(r^{|n|}\)
shrinks faster for larger \(|n|\).
The Poisson Integral Formula
Substituting the Fourier coefficients back into the series and interchanging the
order of summation and integration, justified by the absolute convergence of
\(\sum r^{|n|}\) for \(r \lt 1\), yields
\[
\begin{align*}
u(r, \theta)
&= \sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} \left(\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(\phi)\, e^{+in\phi}\, d\phi\right) r^{|n|}\, e^{-in\theta} \\\\
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(\phi) \left(\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} r^{|n|}\, e^{-in(\theta - \phi)}\right) d\phi.
\end{align*}
\]
The inner sum is a function of \(r\) and \(\theta - \phi\) alone. Writing
\(\psi = \theta - \phi\) and splitting at \(n = 0\), we obtain
\[
\sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} r^{|n|}\, e^{-in\psi}
= 1 + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} r^n\, e^{-in\psi}
+ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} r^n\, e^{in\psi}.
\]
Each tail is a geometric series in the ratio \(r e^{\mp i\psi}\), of modulus
\(r \lt 1\). Summing,
\[
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \bigl(r e^{-i\psi}\bigr)^n
&= \frac{r e^{-i\psi}}{1 - r e^{-i\psi}}, \\\\
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \bigl(r e^{i\psi}\bigr)^n
&= \frac{r e^{i\psi}}{1 - r e^{i\psi}}.
\end{align*}
\]
Adding the two tails to \(1\), placing over a common denominator
\((1 - r e^{-i\psi})(1 - r e^{i\psi}) = 1 - 2r\cos\psi + r^2\), and simplifying the
numerator yields
\[
\sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} r^{|n|}\, e^{-in\psi}
= \frac{1 - r^2}{1 - 2r\cos\psi + r^2}.
\]
The right-hand side depends on \(\psi\) only through \(\cos\psi\), so the kernel is
even in \(\psi\) and the sign in the exponent of the original sum did not affect the
final closed form. Dividing by \(2\pi\), we obtain the kernel.
Definition: Poisson Kernel on the Disk
For \(0 \leq r \lt 1\) and \(\psi \in \mathbb{R}\), the
Poisson kernel on the unit disk is
\[
P_r(\psi)
= \frac{1}{2\pi} \cdot \frac{1 - r^2}{1 - 2r\cos\psi + r^2}.
\]
Equivalently, \(P_r(\psi) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{n \in \mathbb{Z}} r^{|n|}\, e^{-in\psi}\)
as an absolutely convergent series.
The Poisson kernel is positive on its domain (the denominator
\(1 - 2r\cos\psi + r^2 = (1 - r)^2 + 2r(1 - \cos\psi) \geq (1 - r)^2 \gt 0\) is
strictly positive, and the numerator \(1 - r^2 \gt 0\) for \(r \lt 1\)). A direct
integration of its series representation against \(d\psi\) gives
\(\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} P_r(\psi)\, d\psi = 1\) (only the \(n = 0\) term survives after
integration). With the kernel identified, the series solution takes integral form.
Theorem: Poisson Integral Formula on the Disk
Let \(f\) be a continuous \(2\pi\)-periodic function on \(\mathbb{R}\)
(equivalently, a continuous function on \(\partial D\)). The function
\[
u(r, \theta)
= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} P_r(\theta - \phi)\, f(\phi)\, d\phi
\quad (0 \leq r \lt 1)
\]
is harmonic on \(D\), extends continuously to the closed disk \(\overline{D}\),
and satisfies \(u(1, \theta) = f(\theta)\) on \(\partial D\). It is the unique
such solution of the Dirichlet problem on the disk. Uniqueness is established
later as a consequence of the maximum principle.
Proof:
Harmonicity. We argue in two steps. First, for each fixed \(\phi\), the
kernel \(P_r(\theta - \phi)\) is itself harmonic as a function of
\((r, \theta)\) on the open disk. This follows from its series representation
\[
P_r(\theta - \phi) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_n r^{|n|} e^{-in(\theta - \phi)}.
\]
Each term \(r^{|n|} e^{-in(\theta - \phi)}\) is one of the separated product
solutions constructed earlier and is therefore harmonic. The series and all its
term-by-term partial derivatives in \((r, \theta)\) of any fixed order converge
absolutely and uniformly on each compact subset \(K \subset D\), a consequence
of \(\sum |n|^k r^{|n|} \lt \infty\) for \(r \lt 1\). Termwise application of
\(\Delta\) therefore gives \(\Delta P_r(\theta - \phi) = 0\) on \(D\).
Second, on each compact \(K \subset D\) the same termwise bounds make
\(P_r\) and its \((r,\theta)\)-second derivatives bounded uniformly in
\(\phi \in [-\pi, \pi]\). For continuous \(f\) on the compact interval
\([-\pi, \pi]\), differentiation under the integral sign is therefore valid
on \(K\), and
\[
\begin{align*}
\Delta u(r, \theta)
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \Delta_{(r,\theta)} P_r(\theta - \phi)\, f(\phi)\, d\phi \\\\
&= 0
\end{align*}
\]
on \(D\).
Boundary behaviour. As \(r \to 1^-\), the Poisson kernel \(P_r(\psi)\)
concentrates near \(\psi = 0\). Its peak value at \(\psi = 0\) is
\(\frac{1}{2\pi}\,\frac{1+r}{1-r}\), tending to \(+\infty\). For each fixed
\(\delta \gt 0\) the denominator is bounded below by
\(1 - 2r\cos\delta + r^2 \to 2(1 - \cos\delta) \gt 0\) on
\(|\psi| \geq \delta\), so \(\sup_{|\psi| \geq \delta} P_r(\psi) \to 0\) as
\(r \to 1^-\). Combined with positivity and the normalization
\(\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} P_r(\psi)\, d\psi = 1\), these three properties make
\(\{P_r\}_{r \lt 1}\) an approximate identity on the circle as
\(r \to 1^-\).
For continuous \(f\), uniform continuity on the compact circle gives, for each
\(\varepsilon \gt 0\), a \(\delta \gt 0\) such that
\(|f(\phi) - f(\theta)| \lt \varepsilon\) whenever
\(|\phi - \theta| \lt \delta\) (taken mod \(2\pi\)). Using \(\int P_r = 1\) to
write
\(u(r, \theta) - f(\theta) = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} P_r(\theta - \phi) \bigl[f(\phi) - f(\theta)\bigr]\, d\phi\),
and splitting the integration domain into \(|\theta - \phi| \lt \delta\) and
\(|\theta - \phi| \geq \delta\) (mod \(2\pi\)):
\[
\begin{align*}
\bigl|u(r, \theta) - f(\theta)\bigr| \leq
&\varepsilon \int_{|\theta - \phi| \lt \delta} P_r(\theta - \phi)\, d\phi \\\\
&+ 2\|f\|_\infty \int_{|\theta - \phi| \geq \delta} P_r(\theta - \phi)\, d\phi.
\end{align*}
\]
The first integral is bounded by \(\int P_r = 1\), giving an \(\varepsilon\)
contribution. The second is bounded by
\(2\pi \sup_{|\psi| \geq \delta} P_r(\psi)\), which can be made smaller than
\(\varepsilon\) by choosing \(r\) sufficiently close to \(1\). Both bounds are
uniform in \(\theta\), so \(\|u(r, \cdot) - f\|_\infty \to 0\) as \(r \to 1^-\).
This establishes continuity of \(u\) on \(\overline{D}\) and the boundary value
\(u(1, \theta) = f(\theta)\).
The Poisson kernel \(P_r(\theta - \phi)\) belongs to a broader family of integral
kernels that arise in the theory of linear elliptic boundary-value problems. The
fundamental object of that theory is the Green's function
\(G(x, y)\) for the Laplace operator on a domain \(\Omega\), defined as the solution
to \(\Delta_x G(x, y) = \delta_y(x)\) (the response to a point source at \(y\)) with
\(G(x, y) = 0\) for \(x \in \partial\Omega\). The Green's function solves the
inhomogeneous problem \(\Delta u = f\) with homogeneous boundary data. The Poisson
kernel is its companion for the complementary problem treated on this page, namely
the homogeneous equation \(\Delta u = 0\) with inhomogeneous boundary data
\(u|_{\partial\Omega} = f\), and is recovered from the Green's function by taking
its normal derivative on the boundary,
\[
P(x, y) = -\frac{\partial G(x, y)}{\partial n_y} \text{ for } y \in \partial\Omega.
\]
The two kernels are therefore distinct objects. The function \(G\) satisfies an
inhomogeneous equation involving the Dirac delta and is not harmonic, while \(P\) is
itself harmonic on the open domain. The Green's function for the disk and its
derivation via the method of images, along with the full distributional theory
underlying \(\Delta G = \delta_y\), belong to a more advanced treatment than the
present one and are not developed here. The name is introduced now because the same
structural pair will reappear in the next section in a different geometric setting.
That pair is a boundary kernel on a domain, arising as the normal derivative of an
underlying Green's function.
Laplace Equation on the Half-Plane
Replacing the unit disk by the upper half-plane
\(\mathbb{H} = \{(x, y) : y \gt 0\}\) changes the analytic situation in the same
structural way that passing from the bounded interval to the real line did for the
heat equation. The boundary loses its compactness, the angular Fourier series of the
disk becomes the continuous Fourier transform on \(\mathbb{R}\), and the discrete
sum over modes is replaced by an integral over a continuous frequency variable. The
Fourier transform
developed earlier is the natural tool, and the parallel with the disk treatment will
be exact. A Fourier-side computation that diagonalizes the spatial derivative will
produce, after inversion, a Poisson integral representation with a kernel of
different geometric form but the same structural role.
The Dirichlet problem on the upper half-plane is
\[
\begin{cases}
\Delta u(x, y) = 0, & (x, y) \in \mathbb{H}, \\\\
u(x, 0) = f(x), & x \in \mathbb{R},
\end{cases}
\]
with \(f\) a continuous and suitably decaying boundary datum on \(\mathbb{R}\), and
\(u(x, y)\) required to decay as \(y \to \infty\) and to remain bounded as
\(|x| \to \infty\).
These decay requirements pick out the natural function class for the problem and
rule out, for instance, the addition of a constant (which trivially satisfies
\(\Delta u = 0\) but fails the decay condition unless the constant is zero) or
polynomially growing harmonic backgrounds. Most pointedly, \(u(x, y) = y\) is itself
a non-trivial harmonic function vanishing on the real line, so without a growth
restriction uniqueness fails outright. Decay at infinity plays here the role that
regularity at the origin played on the disk.
Fourier Transform in the Horizontal Variable
Define the spatial Fourier transform of \(u(\cdot, y)\) for each fixed \(y \gt 0\):
\[
\hat{u}(\xi, y) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} u(x, y)\, e^{ix\xi}\, dx.
\]
Applying the transform to the Laplace equation and using the
differentiation property
twice in \(x\), which produces the factor \((-i\xi)^2 = -\xi^2\), converts the
partial differential equation in \((x, y)\) into an ordinary differential equation
in \(y\) alone, with \(\xi\) entering as a parameter:
Theorem: Fourier-Transformed Laplace Equation on the Half-Plane
Let \(u(x, y)\) be a \(C^2\) solution of the Laplace equation on \(\mathbb{H}\),
with \(u(\cdot, y)\) decaying at infinity in \(x\) for each fixed \(y \gt 0\),
and let \(\hat{u}(\xi, y)\) denote its spatial Fourier transform. Then, for each
\(\xi \in \mathbb{R}\), the function \(y \mapsto \hat{u}(\xi, y)\) satisfies the
second-order linear ODE
\[
\begin{align*}
\partial_{yy} \hat{u}(\xi, y) - \xi^2\, \hat{u}(\xi, y) &= 0, \\\\
\hat{u}(\xi, 0) &= \hat{f}(\xi).
\end{align*}
\]
Imposing additionally that \(\hat{u}(\xi, y) \to 0\) as \(y \to \infty\) for
each \(\xi \neq 0\), the unique solution is
\[
\hat{u}(\xi, y) = \hat{f}(\xi)\, e^{-|\xi| y}.
\]
Proof:
Differentiation under the integral sign in \(y\) is justified by the
regularity and decay hypotheses on \(u\). Then
\[
\begin{align*}
\partial_{yy} \hat{u}(\xi, y)
&= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \partial_{yy} u(x, y)\, e^{ix\xi}\, dx \\\\
&= -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \partial_{xx} u(x, y)\, e^{ix\xi}\, dx \\\\
&= -(-i\xi)^2\, \hat{u}(\xi, y) \\\\
&= \xi^2\, \hat{u}(\xi, y),
\end{align*}
\]
where the second equality uses the Laplace equation
\[
\partial_{yy} u = -\partial_{xx} u
\]
and the third applies the differentiation property of the Fourier transform twice in \(x\), with the
boundary terms from the two integrations by parts vanishing by the assumed
decay of \(u\) and \(\partial_x u\) in \(x\). The boundary condition
\(u(x, 0) = f(x)\) translates directly under the transform to
\(\hat{u}(\xi, 0) = \hat{f}(\xi)\).
For each fixed \(\xi\), the equation \(\partial_{yy} \hat{u} = \xi^2\, \hat{u}\)
is a scalar linear ODE in \(y\) with characteristic equation
\(\alpha^2 = \xi^2\), roots \(\alpha = \pm |\xi|\). The general solution is
\[
\hat{u}(\xi, y) = A(\xi)\, e^{|\xi| y} + B(\xi)\, e^{-|\xi| y}.
\]
For \(\xi \neq 0\), the term \(e^{|\xi| y}\) grows without bound as
\(y \to \infty\). Decay of \(\hat{u}(\xi, y)\) to zero therefore forces
\(A(\xi) = 0\). The boundary condition then gives \(B(\xi) = \hat{f}(\xi)\),
yielding the stated solution. At \(\xi = 0\), the ODE degenerates to
\(\partial_{yy} \hat{u}(0, y) = 0\), whose solutions are affine in \(y\).
Boundedness rules out the linear term, and the boundary condition fixes the
constant as \(\hat{f}(0)\), in exact agreement with the limit
\(\lim_{\xi \to 0} \hat{f}(\xi)\, e^{-|\xi| y} = \hat{f}(0)\). The formula
\(\hat{u}(\xi, y) = \hat{f}(\xi)\, e^{-|\xi| y}\) therefore holds for all
\(\xi \in \mathbb{R}\) by continuous extension.
The structural parallel with the disk is exact. There the angular Fourier
coefficients \(c_n\) of the boundary datum were propagated inward by the radial
factor \(r^{|n|}\), which decays as \(r\) moves from the boundary \(r = 1\) toward
the interior origin \(r = 0\). Here the continuous Fourier transform
\(\hat{f}(\xi)\) of the boundary datum is propagated upward by the factor
\(e^{-|\xi| y}\), which decays as \(y\) moves from the boundary \(y = 0\) into the
interior \(y \gt 0\). In both cases, high-frequency boundary content is damped
fastest, and only low-frequency content survives deep into the interior. The factor
\(r^{|n|}\) shrinks rapidly for large \(|n|\), and \(e^{-|\xi| y}\) shrinks rapidly
for large \(|\xi|\).
The Half-Plane Poisson Kernel
To recover \(u(x, y)\) we invert the Fourier transform of the right-hand side,
applying the Fourier inversion formula:
\[
u(x, y)
= \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \hat{f}(\xi)\, e^{-|\xi| y}\, e^{-ix\xi}\, d\xi.
\]
The identification of this expression as a convolution of \(f\) with a kernel
requires the inverse transform of \(e^{-|\xi| y}\) itself, which is computable in
closed form by a direct split-integral computation. For fixed \(y \gt 0\),
\[
\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-|\xi| y}\, e^{-ix\xi}\, d\xi
= \frac{1}{2\pi}\left[\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\xi y - ix\xi}\, d\xi
+ \int_{-\infty}^{0} e^{\xi y - ix\xi}\, d\xi\right].
\]
Each integral is elementary: the first equals \(\frac{1}{y + ix}\), the second
\(\frac{1}{y - ix}\). Their sum is
\[
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{y + ix} + \frac{1}{y - ix}
&= \frac{(y - ix) + (y + ix)}{(y + ix)(y - ix)} \\\\
&= \frac{2y}{x^2 + y^2}.
\end{align*}
\]
Dividing by \(2\pi\) gives the kernel.
Definition: Poisson Kernel on the Upper Half-Plane
For \(y \gt 0\) and \(x \in \mathbb{R}\), the
Poisson kernel on the upper half-plane is
\[
P_y(x) = \frac{1}{\pi} \cdot \frac{y}{x^2 + y^2}.
\]
Equivalently, \(P_y\) is the inverse Fourier transform of \(e^{-|\xi| y}\):
\(\widehat{P_y}(\xi) = e^{-|\xi| y}\).
The half-plane Poisson kernel is positive on its domain (\(y \gt 0\) makes both
numerator and denominator positive), and a direct integration gives
\[
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} P_y(x)\, dx
&= \frac{1}{\pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{y}{x^2 + y^2}\, dx \\\\
&= \frac{1}{\pi}\left[\arctan\!\frac{x}{y}\right]_{-\infty}^{\infty} \\\\
&= 1.
\end{align*}
\]
With the kernel identified, the inverse transform expresses the solution as a
convolution.
Theorem: Poisson Integral Formula on the Half-Plane
Let \(f\) be a bounded continuous function on \(\mathbb{R}\). The function
\[
u(x, y)
= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} P_y(x - s)\, f(s)\, ds
\quad (y \gt 0)
\]
is harmonic on the upper half-plane \(\mathbb{H}\), extends continuously to the
closed half-plane \(\overline{\mathbb{H}}\) at every point of the boundary, and
satisfies \(u(x, 0) = f(x)\) on \(\partial\mathbb{H}\). It is the unique
solution of the Dirichlet problem on \(\mathbb{H}\) in the class of bounded
continuous extensions. Uniqueness is established later as a consequence of the
maximum principle.
Proof:
Harmonicity. Direct differentiation gives, for
\((x, y) \in \mathbb{H}\),
\[
\begin{align*}
\partial_{xx} \frac{y}{x^2 + y^2} &= \frac{2y(3x^2 - y^2)}{(x^2 + y^2)^3}, \\\\
\partial_{yy} \frac{y}{x^2 + y^2} &= \frac{2y(y^2 - 3x^2)}{(x^2 + y^2)^3},
\end{align*}
\]
whose sum vanishes. Hence \(\Delta P_y(x) = 0\) on \(\mathbb{H}\) as a function
of the two variables \((x, y)\). On each compact \(K \subset \mathbb{H}\), the
kernel and its second \((x,y)\)-derivatives are bounded uniformly in \(s\)
(since they decay like \(|x-s|^{-3}\) as \(|s| \to \infty\) with \(y\) bounded
away from \(0\) on \(K\)), so for bounded \(f\) differentiation under the
integral sign is valid on \(K\). This gives
\(\Delta u(x, y) = \int \Delta_{(x,y)} P_y(x - s)\, f(s)\, ds = 0\) on
\(\mathbb{H}\).
Boundary behaviour. As \(y \to 0^+\), the kernel \(P_y(x)\)
concentrates near \(x = 0\). Its peak value at \(x = 0\) is \(\frac{1}{\pi y}\),
which tends to \(+\infty\), while for any fixed \(x \neq 0\) the denominator
\(x^2 + y^2\) stays bounded below by \(x^2\) and \(P_y(x) \to 0\). Combined with
positivity and the normalization \(\int_{-\infty}^\infty P_y(x)\, dx = 1\), this
makes \(\{P_y\}_{y \gt 0}\) an approximate identity on
\(\mathbb{R}\) as \(y \to 0^+\).
For bounded continuous \(f\), fix \(x_0 \in \mathbb{R}\) and
\(\varepsilon \gt 0\). By continuity of \(f\) at \(x_0\), choose
\(\delta \gt 0\) so that \(|f(s) - f(x_0)| \lt \varepsilon\) whenever
\(|s - x_0| \lt \delta\). Using \(\int_{-\infty}^\infty P_y(x_0 - s)\, ds = 1\),
\[
u(x_0, y) - f(x_0)
= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} P_y(x_0 - s)\,\bigl[f(s) - f(x_0)\bigr]\, ds,
\]
and splitting the integration domain into \(|s - x_0| \lt \delta\) and
\(|s - x_0| \geq \delta\):
\[
\begin{align*}
\bigl|u(x_0, y) - f(x_0)\bigr|
\leq
&\varepsilon \int_{|s - x_0| \lt \delta} P_y(x_0 - s)\, ds \\\\
&+ 2\|f\|_\infty \int_{|s - x_0| \geq \delta} P_y(x_0 - s)\, ds.
\end{align*}
\]
The first integral is bounded by \(\int P_y = 1\), giving an \(\varepsilon\)
contribution. For the second, the change of variable \(\sigma = s - x_0\)
together with the symmetry \(P_y(-\sigma) = P_y(\sigma)\) gives
\[
\begin{align*}
\int_{|s - x_0| \geq \delta} P_y(x_0 - s)\, ds
&= \frac{2}{\pi}\int_\delta^{\infty} \frac{y}{\sigma^2 + y^2}\, d\sigma \\\\
&= \frac{2}{\pi}\,\arctan\!\frac{y}{\delta},
\end{align*}
\]
which tends to \(0\) as \(y \to 0^+\) (since
\(\arctan(y/\delta) \to \arctan 0 = 0\)). Choosing \(y\) small enough makes the
second contribution less than \(\varepsilon\). Hence
\(|u(x_0, y) - f(x_0)| \to 0\) as \(y \to 0^+\). Since \(x_0 \in \mathbb{R}\)
was arbitrary, \(u\) extends continuously to \(\overline{\mathbb{H}}\) at every
boundary point with the boundary value \(u(x_0, 0) = f(x_0)\).
Parallel Structure: Disk and Half-Plane
The two Dirichlet problems just solved share more than terminology. In each case a
Fourier-mode decomposition of the boundary datum (discrete on the circle, continuous
on the line) is damped into the interior by a factor parametrized by the distance
from the boundary, producing a positive harmonic kernel that integrates to one and
concentrates onto a single boundary point. The disk kernel
\[
P_r(\psi) = \tfrac{1}{2\pi}(1 - r^2)/(1 - 2r\cos\psi + r^2)
\]
and the half-plane kernel
\[
P_y(x) = \tfrac{1}{\pi}\, y/(x^2 + y^2)
\]
are two realizations of this pattern, differing in geometric form but identical in
role. Both arise as boundary normal derivatives of an underlying Green's function on
their respective domains.
A further parallel reaches back to the heat and wave equations. The heat equation on
the real line was solved by the heat kernel
\[
K_t(x) = (4\pi k t)^{-1/2} e^{-x^2/(4kt)},
\]
parametrized by the time variable \(t\), which concentrates onto the initial datum
as \(t \to 0^+\) and provides the solution by convolution.
The wave equation admitted no such kernel representation. Instead, d'Alembert's
formula is a different structural object, not a convolution with a single
approximate identity. The Laplace equation on the disk and on the half-plane both
admit Poisson-kernel representations parametrized by the boundary-distance
coordinate, which plays in the elliptic setting the role that time played in the
parabolic setting. Where heat has a one-parameter family of kernels concentrating
onto the time-zero slice, Laplace has a one-parameter family of kernels
concentrating onto the spatial boundary. Where heat propagates information forward
in time by convolution with a Gaussian, Laplace propagates information inward from
the boundary by convolution with a Poisson kernel.
Harmonic Function Properties
The Poisson integral formulas just constructed are tied to the disk and the
half-plane, and to the coordinate systems adapted to those two domains. We now turn
to two qualitative properties that hold for every harmonic function on any
open subset of the plane, irrespective of domain shape: the mean value
property and the maximum principle. Both will be derived
from the Poisson integral on the disk, but their conclusions are domain-independent
and supply the analytic structure that, in the heat-and-wave parallel, was carried
by smoothing and energy conservation respectively.
The maximum principle in particular is the signature property of the elliptic case,
the pointwise bound on the solution by its boundary data. It is the result that
closes the gap left in
the heat-equation treatment, where the
boundary-data form of the principle was stated without proof.
Definition: Harmonic Function
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2\) be open. A function
\(u : \Omega \to \mathbb{R}\) of class \(C^2\) is called
harmonic on \(\Omega\) if
\[
\begin{align*}
\Delta u(x, y)
&= \partial_{xx} u(x, y) + \partial_{yy} u(x, y) \\\\
&= 0 \quad \text{for every } (x, y) \in \Omega.
\end{align*}
\]
The Mean Value Property
The Poisson integral formula on the unit disk already suggests the statement of the
mean value property. Evaluating the kernel at \(r = 0\) gives
\(P_0(\psi) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\), independent of \(\psi\), so the Poisson
representation of any harmonic function constructed via the Poisson integral
collapses, at the centre, to the plain average of its boundary values. This
special-case identity furnishes the form of the mean value property. Asserting it
for an arbitrary harmonic function on an arbitrary domain, rather than only for
functions defined as Poisson integrals, requires a proof that does not presuppose
the Poisson representation. The argument below uses the polar form of the Laplacian
directly, avoiding any appeal to uniqueness of the Dirichlet problem (established
below via the maximum principle).
Theorem: Mean Value Property of Harmonic Functions
Let \(u\) be harmonic on an open set \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2\), and
let \(\overline{D(x_0, \rho)} \subset \Omega\) be a closed disk centred at
\(x_0\) with radius \(\rho \gt 0\). Then \(u(x_0)\) equals both the average
of \(u\) over the boundary circle and the average of \(u\) over the disk:
\[
\begin{align*}
u(x_0)
&= \frac{1}{2\pi\rho}\int_{\partial D(x_0, \rho)} u\, ds \\\\
&= \frac{1}{\pi\rho^2}\int_{D(x_0, \rho)} u\, dA,
\end{align*}
\]
where \(ds\) is the arc-length element on the circle and \(dA\) the area
element on the disk.
Proof:
Boundary-average form. By translation it suffices to take \(x_0 = 0\).
Introduce polar coordinates \((r, \theta)\) centred at the origin and write
\(\tilde u(r, \theta) := u(r\cos\theta, r\sin\theta)\) for the polar
representation of \(u\). Here \(\rho_* \gt \rho\) is chosen so that
\(\overline{D(0, \rho_*)} \subset \Omega\), and \(\tilde u\) is \(C^2\) on the
strip \((0, \rho_*) \times \mathbb{R}\) and \(2\pi\)-periodic in \(\theta\) for
each fixed \(r\). For \(r \in [0, \rho_*)\) define the angular average
\[
I(r) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \tilde u(r, \theta)\, d\theta.
\]
We will show \(I(r) = u(0)\) for every \(r \in [0, \rho_*)\). Applying this at
\(r = \rho\) and using \(ds = \rho\, d\theta\) on \(\partial D(0, \rho)\) will
give the stated boundary-average formula.
On each compact set \([r_1, r_2] \times [0, 2\pi]\) with
\(0 \lt r_1 \lt r_2 \lt \rho_*\), the function \(\tilde u\) and its first- and
second-order partial derivatives in \((r, \theta)\) are continuous and hence
bounded. Differentiation under the integral sign is therefore valid on
\((0, \rho_*)\), and
\[
I'(r)
= \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \partial_r \tilde u(r, \theta)\, d\theta.
\]
Multiplying by \(r\) and differentiating once more,
\[
\begin{align*}
\bigl(r\, I'(r)\bigr)'
&= \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \bigl(\partial_r \tilde u + r\, \partial_{rr} \tilde u\bigr)(r, \theta)\, d\theta \\\\
&= \frac{r}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \left(\partial_{rr} \tilde u + \frac{1}{r}\partial_r \tilde u\right)(r, \theta)\, d\theta.
\end{align*}
\]
The polar form of the Laplacian
\(\Delta u = \partial_{rr} \tilde u + \frac{1}{r}\partial_r \tilde u + \frac{1}{r^2}\partial_{\theta\theta} \tilde u\),
derived earlier, and the harmonicity assumption \(\Delta u = 0\) give
\(\partial_{rr} \tilde u + \frac{1}{r}\partial_r \tilde u = -\frac{1}{r^2}\partial_{\theta\theta} \tilde u\)
on \((0, \rho_*) \times \mathbb{R}\). Substituting,
\[
\begin{align*}
\bigl(r\, I'(r)\bigr)'
&= -\frac{1}{2\pi r}\int_0^{2\pi} \partial_{\theta\theta} \tilde u(r, \theta)\, d\theta \\\\
&= -\frac{1}{2\pi r}\bigl[\partial_\theta \tilde u(r, \theta)\bigr]_{\theta=0}^{\theta=2\pi} \\\\
&= 0,
\end{align*}
\]
the last equality holding because \(\partial_\theta \tilde u\) is
\(2\pi\)-periodic in \(\theta\) (a consequence of the \(2\pi\)-periodicity of
\(\tilde u\) itself together with the \(C^2\) regularity).
Hence \(r\, I'(r)\) is constant on \((0, \rho_*)\). Since
\(\partial_r \tilde u\) is continuous on the compact set
\(\overline{D(0, \rho_*/2)}\) and therefore bounded there, we have
\(|r\, I'(r)| \leq r \cdot \sup |\partial_r \tilde u| \to 0\) as \(r \to 0^+\).
The constant is therefore zero, and \(I'(r) \equiv 0\) on \((0, \rho_*)\).
The function \(I\) is also continuous at \(r = 0\). The integrand
\(\tilde u(r, \theta) = u(r\cos\theta, r\sin\theta)\) is continuous in
\((r, \theta)\), so \(\lim_{r \to 0^+} \tilde u(r, \theta) = u(0)\) uniformly in
\(\theta \in [0, 2\pi]\), giving \(\lim_{r \to 0^+} I(r) = u(0) = I(0)\).
Combined with \(I'(r) \equiv 0\) on \((0, \rho_*)\), this yields \(I(r) = u(0)\)
for every \(r \in [0, \rho_*)\). Evaluating at \(r = \rho\) and using
\(ds = \rho\, d\theta\) on \(\partial D(0, \rho)\),
\[
\begin{align*}
u(0)
&= \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} u(\rho\cos\theta, \rho\sin\theta)\, d\theta \\\\
&= \frac{1}{2\pi\rho}\int_{\partial D(0, \rho)} u\, ds.
\end{align*}
\]
Reversing the translation reinstates a general centre \(x_0\).
Volume-average form. The boundary-average identity reads
\(\int_{\partial D(x_0, t)} u\, ds = 2\pi t\, u(x_0)\) for every
\(t \in (0, \rho]\). Integrating in \(t\) from \(0\) to \(\rho\),
\[
\begin{align*}
\int_0^\rho \int_{\partial D(x_0, t)} u\, ds\, dt
&= 2\pi\, u(x_0) \int_0^\rho t\, dt \\\\
&= \pi \rho^2\, u(x_0).
\end{align*}
\]
On the disk \(D(x_0, \rho)\), polar coordinates centred at \(x_0\) give the area
element \(dA = t\, dt\, d\theta\), and the arc-length element on
\(\partial D(x_0, t)\) is \(ds = t\, d\theta\). Hence
\[
\begin{align*}
\int_0^\rho \int_{\partial D(x_0, t)} u\, ds\, dt
&= \int_0^\rho \int_0^{2\pi} u(x_0 + t e^{i\theta})\, t\, d\theta\, dt \\\\
&= \int_{D(x_0, \rho)} u\, dA.
\end{align*}
\]
Equating and dividing by \(\pi \rho^2\) yields the volume-average form.
The Maximum Principle
The mean value property has an immediate qualitative consequence. A harmonic
function cannot attain a strict interior maximum on a connected domain. Any point at
which the function takes its maximum value would be forced, by the average being
equal to the maximum, to be a value that every nearby point on a
surrounding circle also takes. Iterating this observation spreads the maximum value
through the connected component. The precise statement is the elliptic counterpart
of the heat-equation pointwise bound, with the initial-time data slice replaced by
the spatial boundary.
Theorem: Maximum Principle for Harmonic Functions
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2\) be a bounded open set and let
\(u : \overline{\Omega} \to \mathbb{R}\) be continuous on \(\overline{\Omega}\)
and harmonic on \(\Omega\). Then \(u\) attains its maximum and minimum on the
boundary \(\partial\Omega\):
\[
\begin{align*}
\max_{\overline{\Omega}} u &= \max_{\partial\Omega} u, \\\\
\min_{\overline{\Omega}} u &= \min_{\partial\Omega} u.
\end{align*}
\]
In particular, for every interior point \(x \in \Omega\),
\[
\min_{\partial\Omega} u \leq u(x) \leq \max_{\partial\Omega} u.
\]
Proof:
The boundedness of \(\Omega\) makes \(\overline{\Omega}\) compact. The
continuity of \(u\) on \(\overline{\Omega}\) then guarantees that \(u\) attains
its maximum somewhere on \(\overline{\Omega}\). We show that the maximum is
attained on the boundary. The minimum claim follows by applying the same
argument to \(-u\), which is also harmonic.
Let \(M = \max_{\overline{\Omega}} u\) and define the set of maximum points in
the interior,
\[
E = \{x \in \Omega : u(x) = M\}.
\]
If \(E\) is empty, the maximum is attained only on the boundary and the claim
holds. Otherwise, we show that the connected component of \(\Omega\) containing
any \(x_0 \in E\) is contained entirely in \(E\). Continuity then carries the
value \(M\) to the boundary of that component, which lies in \(\partial\Omega\).
Fix \(x_0 \in E\). Since \(\Omega\) is open, choose \(\rho \gt 0\) small enough
that \(\overline{D(x_0, \rho)} \subset \Omega\). The mean value property gives
\[
M = u(x_0) = \frac{1}{\pi \rho^2}\int_{D(x_0, \rho)} u\, dA.
\]
Since \(u \leq M\) everywhere on \(\overline{\Omega}\), the integrand \(M - u\)
is non-negative on \(D(x_0, \rho)\). The identity above is equivalent to
\[
\int_{D(x_0, \rho)} (M - u)\, dA = 0.
\]
For a non-negative continuous integrand, a zero integral forces the integrand to
vanish identically (if \(M - u\) were positive at some point, continuity would
keep it positive on a neighbourhood of positive area, making the integral
strictly positive). Hence \(u \equiv M\) on \(D(x_0, \rho)\), and
\(D(x_0, \rho) \subset E\). This shows \(E\) is open as a subset of \(\Omega\).
The set \(E\) is also closed in \(\Omega\). If \(x_n \in E\) with
\(x_n \to x \in \Omega\), continuity of \(u\) gives \(u(x) = \lim u(x_n) = M\),
so \(x \in E\). Within the connected component of \(\Omega\) containing \(x_0\),
the set \(E\) is therefore both open and closed and nonempty. By connectedness,
\(E\) coincides with the entire component. Thus \(u \equiv M\) on this
component, and by continuity on \(\overline{\Omega}\), \(u \equiv M\) on the
closure of the component as well, and in particular on its boundary, which is
part of \(\partial\Omega\). The maximum \(M\) is therefore attained on
\(\partial\Omega\).
The maximum principle yields uniqueness for the Dirichlet problem as an immediate
corollary, paralleling the role energy conservation played for the wave equation.
Suppose \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) are two solutions of the Dirichlet problem on a bounded
\(\Omega\) with the same continuous boundary datum \(f\) on \(\partial\Omega\).
Their difference \(w = u_1 - u_2\) is harmonic on \(\Omega\), continuous on
\(\overline{\Omega}\), and satisfies \(w|_{\partial\Omega} = 0\). The maximum
principle gives \(\max_{\overline{\Omega}} w = \max_{\partial\Omega} w = 0\) and
\(\min_{\overline{\Omega}} w = \min_{\partial\Omega} w = 0\), so \(w \equiv 0\) on
\(\overline{\Omega}\). Hence \(u_1 = u_2\).
The Poisson integral formulas constructed earlier therefore give the
solution of the Dirichlet problem on the disk and on the half-plane respectively,
not merely a solution. This is the elliptic analogue of the energy-based
uniqueness established for the wave equation, with the controlling object replaced
from a global quadratic invariant to a bound by the extremes of the boundary data.
The boundary maximum principle discharges the marker placed in the introduction,
where the boundary-data form was promised but not yet derived. The structural
placement of the elliptic case alongside the parabolic pointwise bound and the
hyperbolic energy invariant is codified in the section that follows.
The Algebraic Origin of the Trichotomy
The three classical PDEs developed on these pages share a common algebraic origin. A
general second-order linear PDE in two variables has principal part
\(A u_{xx} + B u_{xy} + C u_{yy}\), and its qualitative behaviour at each point is
governed by the discriminant \(B^2 - 4AC\). This is exactly the same expression that
classifies plane conic sections \(A x^2 + B xy + C y^2 + \cdots = 0\). Negative
discriminant gives ellipses and the elliptic Laplace equation
\(\partial_{xx} u + \partial_{yy} u = 0\), whose discriminant equals \(-4\). Zero
discriminant gives parabolas and the parabolic heat equation
\(\partial_t u - k\, \partial_{xx} u = 0\), whose principal part
\(-k\, \partial_{xx} u\) yields discriminant \(0\). Positive discriminant gives
hyperbolas and the hyperbolic wave equation
\(\partial_{tt} u - c^2\, \partial_{xx} u = 0\), whose discriminant equals \(4c^2\).
The discriminant is the surface manifestation of a deeper algebraic fact. The
principal part \(A u_{xx} + B u_{xy} + C u_{yy}\) is the quadratic form associated
with the symmetric coefficient matrix
\[
M = \begin{pmatrix} A & B/2 \\\\ B/2 & C \end{pmatrix},
\]
and \(B^2 - 4AC = -4 \det M\), so the discriminant records the sign of the
determinant of \(M\), which in turn records the sign pattern of its eigenvalues.
Negative discriminant means \(\det M \gt 0\), so the two eigenvalues of \(M\) share
the same sign. The matrix is then definite, and the PDE is elliptic. Positive
discriminant means \(\det M \lt 0\), so the eigenvalues have opposite signs. The
matrix is then indefinite, and the PDE is hyperbolic. Zero discriminant means
\(\det M = 0\), so one eigenvalue vanishes. The matrix is then degenerate, and the
PDE is parabolic.
The Laplace matrix \(\operatorname{diag}(1, 1)\) has eigenvalues \((+1, +1)\). The
wave matrix \(\operatorname{diag}(-c^2, 1)\) (with the second variable identified
with \(t\)) has eigenvalues \((-c^2, +1)\). The heat matrix
\(\operatorname{diag}(-k, 0)\) has eigenvalues \((-k, 0)\). Naming the three cases
elliptic, parabolic, and hyperbolic is not metaphor. The names record the eigenvalue
sign pattern of a \(2 \times 2\) symmetric matrix, and the same classification
extends verbatim to higher-dimensional PDEs, where the principal symbol is a larger
symmetric matrix and the discriminant \(B^2 - 4AC\) gives way to a richer signature.
The discriminant has a second meaning, geometric rather than algebraic. It governs
the number of real solutions of the characteristic equation
\[
A(dy/dx)^2 - B(dy/dx) + C = 0
\]
for the level curves
\[
\phi(x, y) = \text{const}
\]
along which information propagates. For the wave equation we identify the second
variable \(y\) with time \(t\). The principal part
\[
\partial_{tt} u - c^2 \partial_{xx} u
\]
gives
\[
\begin{align*}
A &= -c^2 \\\\
B &= 0 \\\\
C &= 1
\end{align*}
\]
and the characteristic equation
\[
-c^2(dt/dx)^2 + 1 = 0
\]
has the two real roots
\[
\begin{align*}
dt/dx &= \pm 1/c, \\\\
\text{or equivalently } dx/dt &= \pm c.
\end{align*}
\]
These define two real characteristic families, the lines
\[
x \pm ct = \text{const}
\]
along which d'Alembert's formula carried the travelling waves on
the wave page.
For the heat equation the principal part is \(-\partial_{xx} u\), since the
first-order term \(\partial_t u\) does not enter the classification. The quadratic
in \(dt/dx\) is degenerate, and the characteristic condition reduces to
\(\phi_x = 0\), giving a single family of characteristics \(t = \text{const}\).
Information at any instant is coupled across the entire spatial axis at once. This
is the infinite propagation speed of diffusion, recovered here as a geometric
consequence of the parabolic signature.
For the Laplace equation, no real characteristics exist at all. The equation
\(\phi_x^2 + \phi_y^2 = 0\) admits only the trivial solution over the reals. There
is no curve along which information flows, no time direction, no notion of forward
evolution.
The absence of real characteristics has a qualitative consequence. Singularities at
the boundary have no channel along which to propagate into the interior. A
discontinuous boundary datum for the wave equation persists as a discontinuity
travelling along a characteristic line. For the Laplace equation, harmonic functions
are smooth, even real-analytic, at every interior point regardless of boundary
regularity. The maximum-principle machinery developed earlier supplies the
qualitative side of this statement (pointwise boundedness by boundary data). The
full interior-analyticity result belongs to elliptic regularity theory and is not
developed here.
The three controlling quantities catalogued in the maximum-principle section are
three faces of this single algebraic fact, the eigenvalue sign pattern of the
principal-part matrix. Two-characteristic propagation makes the wave equation
conserve mechanical energy along its trajectories. Degenerate-characteristic
diffusion makes heat bounded pointwise by initial data through the maximum principle
on the real line. No-characteristic ellipticity makes Laplace bounded pointwise by
boundary data through the boundary maximum principle. The three classical PDEs
realize three paradigms of information flow: harmonic interpolation, dissipation,
and propagation. Each admits a discrete dual treated elsewhere on these pages. The
graph Laplacian
is the discrete Dirichlet energy operator, and the factorization
\(\boldsymbol{L} = \boldsymbol{B}\boldsymbol{B}^\top\) in terms of the
incidence matrix
of a graph is the discrete counterpart of \(-\Delta\), the positive-definite version
of the continuous Laplacian.
The parallel running through the trichotomy is summarized below.
|
Elliptic (Laplace) |
Parabolic (Heat) |
Hyperbolic (Wave) |
| Equation |
\(\partial_{xx} u + \partial_{yy} u = 0\) |
\(\partial_t u - k\, \partial_{xx} u = 0\) |
\(\partial_{tt} u - c^2 \partial_{xx} u = 0\) |
| Matrix \(M\) |
\(\operatorname{diag}(1,\, 1)\) |
\(\operatorname{diag}(-k,\, 0)\) |
\(\operatorname{diag}(-c^2,\, 1)\) |
| Eigenvalue signs |
\((+,\, +)\), definite |
\((-,\, 0)\), degenerate |
\((-,\, +)\), indefinite |
| Discriminant \(B^2 - 4AC\) |
\(-4 \lt 0\) |
\(0\) |
\(4c^2 \gt 0\) |
| Real characteristics |
none |
one family: \(t = \text{const}\) |
two families: \(x \pm ct = \text{const}\) |
| Controls solution |
boundary data |
initial data |
initial data (energy conserved) |
| Bound by data extremes |
\(\min_{\partial\Omega} u \leq u \leq \max_{\partial\Omega} u\) |
\(\inf f \leq u \leq \sup f\) |
generally none, apart from the integral invariant \(E(t) = E(0)\) |
| Interior regularity |
analytic |
\(C^\infty\) (analytic in \(x\)) |
singularities persist along characteristics |
| Paradigm |
harmonic interpolation |
dissipation |
propagation |
The sign pattern of two eigenvalues produces the analytic, geometric, and discrete
structure of the entire trichotomy. Its three possible patterns are \((+,+)\)
(definite, elliptic), \((-,+)\) (indefinite, hyperbolic), and \((-,0)\) (degenerate,
parabolic).
Interactive Demonstration
The widget below acts on the same initial bump with all three equations side by
side: heat diffuses it forward in time, wave splits it into travelling components,
and Laplace propagates it inward from the boundary along increasing depth \(y\). The
three controlling quantities just catalogued appear directly as readouts beneath
each panel. In the wave panel, the dashed green verticals ride the two
characteristics \(x = \pm ct\) through the origin. These verticals are the two real
characteristic families of the hyperbolic column in the table above, travelling at
exactly \(dx/dt = \pm c\). The demo's built-in self-tests pin this speed on the
compactly supported triangle profile, whose solution vanishes identically outside
the two fronts.
A note on the wave panel's energy readout.
When parts of the travelling wave reach the window's edge, the displayed energy
ratio \(E(t)/E(0)\) drops visibly below unity and is flagged in amber or red. This
happens most easily with the bimodal profile, whose outermost peaks begin at
\(x = \pm 0.4\), but also at large wave speeds with the centred profiles. The
conservation theorem on the unbounded line is exact, so this is not a failure of
energy conservation for the wave equation but a finite-window artifact. Waves that
leave the visible interval cease to contribute to the integral
\[
\tfrac{1}{2}\int_{-1}^{1}\!\bigl[(\partial_t u)^2 + c^2(\partial_x u)^2\bigr] dx
\]
actually being computed. The same universal problem haunts every numerical
simulation of wave propagation on a finite grid, and is the reason absorbing
boundary conditions (Mur conditions, perfectly matched layers, sponge regions) were
invented.
The role of the initial velocity \(g\).
The wave equation is second order in time, so a complete initial datum needs both
the initial shape \(u(\cdot, 0) = f\) and the initial velocity
\(u_t(\cdot, 0) = g\). This distinguishes it sharply from the parabolic heat
equation (one initial datum) and the elliptic Laplace equation (a stationary problem
with no time variable). With \(g \equiv 0\) (the demo's "at rest" preset), the
d'Alembert formula reduces to the arithmetic mean
\[
u(x, t) = \tfrac{1}{2}\bigl[\tilde f(x - ct) + \tilde f(x + ct)\bigr],
\]
so the solution is automatically bounded between \(\min f\) and \(\max f\). That
bound is a degenerate consequence of the vanishing initial velocity, not a property
of the wave equation itself. Switching the "Wave initial velocity" selector to
outward or uniform turns on the integral term
\[
\tfrac{1}{2c}\!\int_{x - ct}^{x + ct} \tilde g(s)\, ds,
\]
which can carry the solution above \(\max f\) or below \(\min f\). The \(\max u\)
readout below the wave panel will then exceed \(1\) and turn amber. That is the
visual confirmation that, unlike the heat and Laplace equations, the wave equation
admits no general pointwise bound by its data, only an integral (energy) invariant.
The dotted teal curve in the wave panel, identified in the legend as \(g(x)\), shows
the second initial datum that hyperbolic dynamics requires.