New Reply

Generalized W Lambert function ...

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
Jan4-12, 03:55 PM   #1
 

Generalized W Lambert function ...


Hi everyone,
I'm currently trying to solve this equation : x²[A+B.exp(x)]=1 for A and B real numbers, and x a complex (this comes from physics, so in my case, Re(x)>0)

I know that x.exp(x)=a has a solution using Lambert function : x=W(a)
I know that x².exp(x)=a may be recast to use the Lambert function, the solution being something like x=2W(sqrt(a)/2)

But what about my equation ? I tried a lot of things to recast the equation and use the Lambert function, but nothing, so I'm asking to you guys ...

Thanks
 
PhysOrg.com
PhysOrg
mathematics news on PhysOrg.com

>> Mathematicians analyze social divisions using cell phone data
>> Can math models of gaming strategies be used to detect terrorism networks?
>> Mathematician proves there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers less than 70 million units apart
Jan5-12, 01:01 AM   #2
 
Quote by MartiniBird View Post
Hi everyone,
I'm currently trying to solve this equation : x²[A+B.exp(x)]=1 for A and B real numbers, and x a complex (this comes from physics, so in my case, Re(x)>0)

I know that x.exp(x)=a has a solution using Lambert function : x=W(a)
I know that x².exp(x)=a may be recast to use the Lambert function, the solution being something like x=2W(sqrt(a)/2)

But what about my equation ? I tried a lot of things to recast the equation and use the Lambert function, but nothing, so I'm asking to you guys ...

Thanks
The roots of the equation x²[A+B.exp(x)]=1 cannot be expressed as a combination of a finite number of elementary functions.
As far as I know, up to now, there is no standard special function which could help to analitically solve it.
Of course, it is possible that someone already defined a particular function in order to formally express the roots. Even if such a function was defined, it cannot be of general use, since the function is not implemented in mathematical softwares, nor common in math background.
Nevertheless, the equation can be solved, thanks to numerical methods. I think that it is presently the usual way to solve these kind of problems when they are encountered in Physics.
 
Jan5-12, 02:17 AM   #3
 
Ok thanks. I know there are other methods to solve that. I have started to find x0 solution of my equation with B=0 (this case has a particular physical signification. For example, x has to be real, not complex in this case). And then, to solve my equation with B≠0, I assume that x=x0+dx and obtain solution with dx complex. But this is just for small variations !!! I don't know I can do that for stronger perturbation dx.

I guess I cannot do something else... first I thought that I could do the assumption B>>A to remove the A in my equation because we know solutions for x².B.exp(x)=1 .... however it seems not correct because the condition to do that is in fact A<<B.cos(Re(x)) that may be not true for some values of x...

But thanks anyway
 
New Reply

Tags
equation, function, lambert, nonlinear
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: Generalized W Lambert function ...
Thread Forum Replies
Some questions about the Lambert W function General Math 2
using lambert's w function Calculus & Beyond Homework 0
Lambert W Function General Math 14
Lambert W Function Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
The generalized Lambert W-function General Math 6