NUMERICAL METHODS
xy(estim.) y(exact)
− 0 .5 (1.648) —
0 (1.000) (1.000)
0 .5 0.648 0.607
1 .0 0.352 0.368
1 .5 0.296 0.223
2 .0 0.056 0.135
2 .5 0.240 0.082
3. 0 − 0. 184 0.050
Table 27.11 The solution of differential equation (27.61) using the Milne
central difference method withh=0.5 and accurate starting values.
more accurate, but of course still approximate, central difference. A more accurate
method based on central differences (Milne’s method) gives the recurrence relation
yi+1=yi− 1 +2h
(
dy
dx
)
i
(27.64)
in general and, in this particular case,
yi+1=yi− 1 − 2 hyi. (27.65)
An additional difficulty now arises, since two initial values ofyare needed.
The second must be estimated by other means (e.g. by using a Taylor series,
as discussed later), but for illustration purposes we will take the accurate value,
y(−h)=exph, as the value ofy− 1 .Ifhis taken as, say, 0.5 and (27.65) is applied
repeatedly, then the results shown in table 27.11 are obtained.
Although some improvement in the early values of the calculatedy(x)is
noticeable, as compared with the corresponding (h=0.5) column of table 27.10,
this scheme soon runs into difficulties, as is obvious from the last two rows of the
table.
Some part of this poor performance is not really attributable to the approxi-
mations made in estimatingdy/dxbut to the form of the equation itself and
hence of its solution.Anyrounding error occurring in the evaluation effectively
introduces intoysome contamination by the solution of
dy
dx
=+y.
This equation has the solutiony(x)=expxand so grows without limit; ultimately
it will dominate the sought-for solution and thus render the calculations totally
inaccurate.
We have only illustrated, rather than analysed, some of the difficulties associated
with simple finite-difference iteration schemes for first-order differential equations,