First of all, thank you for taking the time to thoroughly go through this.

The contradictions that you found is what I was wondering about actually when I was going over the system by hand. I realized that when I was trying to better clarify the initial and boundary conditions for myself. I thought that maybe I was doing something wrong since my supervisor told me that it should work.

The next suggestion I got for the initial conditions was:

S(0)=0.95;
E(0,0) = 0;
Y(0,0)=0.05;
R(0,0)=0;
V(0,0)=0

I was unsure as to whether these would work or not because putting them into what I had for maple gave me the error that initial/boundary conditions must depend on one or two dependent variables. So I didn't see how that was going work.

I'm not sure but I was also given the suggestion to try discretizing in 'a' with an RKF method, or take the boundary conditions and make them homogeneous putting the current conditions into the system itself.  I wonder if this will make a difference.

If you or any others have any other suggestions for how to proceed that would be much appreciated.

Thanks again for taking the time to thoroughly look over my code and find my issues.

-Shannon

First of all, thank you for taking the time to thoroughly go through this.

The contradictions that you found is what I was wondering about actually when I was going over the system by hand. I realized that when I was trying to better clarify the initial and boundary conditions for myself. I thought that maybe I was doing something wrong since my supervisor told me that it should work.

The next suggestion I got for the initial conditions was:

S(0)=0.95;
E(0,0) = 0;
Y(0,0)=0.05;
R(0,0)=0;
V(0,0)=0

I was unsure as to whether these would work or not because putting them into what I had for maple gave me the error that initial/boundary conditions must depend on one or two dependent variables. So I didn't see how that was going work.

I'm not sure but I was also given the suggestion to try discretizing in 'a' with an RKF method, or take the boundary conditions and make them homogeneous putting the current conditions into the system itself.  I wonder if this will make a difference.

If you or any others have any other suggestions for how to proceed that would be much appreciated.

Thanks again for taking the time to thoroughly look over my code and find my issues.

-Shannon

Y(0,t)

thanks for clarifying...i didn't realize i typed it wrong

Y(0,t)

thanks for clarifying...i didn't realize i typed it wrong

not a porblem about the equations. i don't necessarily understand what you mean. are you saying that 'a' and E(a,t) are the same value? thanks for asking though.

i actually meant

R(0,t) = gam*I(0,t);

V(0,t) = v*p(t)*S(t);

E(0,t) = S(t)*beta*I(0,t);

Y(0,t) = alpha*E(0,t);

thx

not a porblem about the equations. i don't necessarily understand what you mean. are you saying that 'a' and E(a,t) are the same value? thanks for asking though.

i actually meant

R(0,t) = gam*I(0,t);

V(0,t) = v*p(t)*S(t);

E(0,t) = S(t)*beta*I(0,t);

Y(0,t) = alpha*E(0,t);

thx

I see what you mean. I will remove that because it is unneccessary. The initial reason for it was that I had an IDE but my supervisor and I decided to define the integral parts as the functions themselves so that it is easier to make the worksheet run. Once the worksheet is running I believe we will be doing something with them but for now it is unneccessary.

thx

I see what you mean. I will remove that because it is unneccessary. The initial reason for it was that I had an IDE but my supervisor and I decided to define the integral parts as the functions themselves so that it is easier to make the worksheet run. Once the worksheet is running I believe we will be doing something with them but for now it is unneccessary.

thx