In this issue, we present two very different papers written in two very different styles. The first is a survey of the multiple timescales method for approximating solutions to differential equations. Multiple timescale methods are common in the literature and an integral part of many graduate programs. However, like riding a bicycle, you need some practice, experience, and insight to use it properly and have meaningful results. The second is an exposition on the Mountain Pass Lemma and related mathematical ideas underlying the existence of saddle points. Despite its name, the second article is no ordinary hike through the hills. In “Profits and Pitfalls of Timescales in Asymptotics,” author Ferdinand Verhulst presents a survey of multiple timescale methods. A colleague of mine once sarcastically pointed out that a tremendous amount of insight can be gleaned from the observation that in almost all problems, parameters are either larger than one or smaller than one, leading to an asymptotic approximation in one form or another. However, one does not have to look far to find problems where it is hard to handle the resulting asymptotic series using a simple Taylor series. Multiple timescales can resolve these problems, but the challenge remains of how to know what the multiple timescales should be without having special knowledge of the problem. Verhulst does an admirable job presenting the basic ideas behind determining timescales a priori using two basic concepts: normal forms and bifurcation theory. In the former case, one transforms the problem into a simpler expression to reveal underlying timescales. In the latter case, understanding the dynamics of a system in terms of bifurcations reveals the qualitative structure of the solution and therefore the timescales. Thus, the author puts order to a body of knowledge that can often appear to students as a disjoint collection of tricks for special problems. In “Mountain Passes and Saddle Points,” author James Bisgard develops the Mountain Pass Lemma of Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz which specifies sufficient conditions for the existence of saddle points. Beginning with accessible examples of smooth functions $F: R^2 \rightarrow R$, we can think of $F$ as the height of the landscape. The central element of this manuscript is a very clear proof of the Mountain Pass Lemma, which essentially states that if there is a local minimum in a valley surrounded by a mountain range and there is a point somewhere beyond the mountain range that is lower than the local minimum, then with an additional special requirement, it can be shown that there must be a mountain pass (saddle point) somewhere. While it may seem that there should always be a mountain pass without any additional requirements, the authors present some counterexamples early in the paper to show that this is not a trivial issue. (I could not resist the urge to fire up my tablet and explore some of the sample surfaces.) The special requirement is the Palais--Smale condition, which is the seemingly peculiar condition that every sequence $x_n$ having two properties, (1) that the height above these points is bounded and (2) that the $\| \nabla F(x_n) \|$ approaches zero, must have a convergent subsequence. The author goes on to extend the Mountain Pass Lemma to domains of any finite dimension and from there to Hilbert spaces. Finally, the author uses the concepts involved in the proof to develop methods for finding saddle points. In summary, the Education section in this issue has something for everyone. The first offering focuses on methods and techniques and would be ideal for a graduate course on perturbation methods or applied mathematics. The second paper is analytic, anchored to theorems and proofs but having ample discussion. It would find a home in an undergraduate and graduate real analysis course. Both take a fresh look at classic subjects in mathematics and could be used to liven up traditional courses in most undergraduate and graduate programs.
Read full abstract