Solving x=y+bsinh(cy) Equation: Help Needed!

  • Thread starter yoseph
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation revolved around an individual trying to solve an equation using the Lambert method. They had success with a similar equation, but were unable to find the correct solution for this specific one. There was also discussion about a paper that claimed to have an exact analytical solution using the Lambert W function, but the solution did not work numerically. There was confusion about the justification for certain steps in the solution.
  • #1
yoseph
6
0
Hi,I have been trying to solve this equation for days.

x=y+bsinh(cy) I wanted to find the variation of y as a function of x.i wanted to use the Lambert method which is great and inline with my problem but i can't get it right folks.

i can solve for any type of x=y+bexp(cy) but i am not successful for that one.

can you help me.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I am not sure you can make the subject of that formula.
 
  • #3
hallo

rock.freak667 said:
I am not sure you can make the subject of that formula.

i am sorry i don't get what you mean.
 
  • #4
yoseph said:
i am sorry i don't get what you mean.

It means rearrange it to become y=something
 
  • #5
I suspect he understood that! He was referring to rock.freak667's reply that he didn't think it could be done! rock.freak667, did you notice the reference to "the Lambert method", by which I think he meant Lambert's W function.

Yoseph, write sinh(cy) as (ecy- e-cy)/2 and you should be able to do that in the same way as y+ becy
 
  • #6
ah...I didn't even see the words Lambert method...
 
  • #7
Ok, I did try it using that way.but the result i got and the one i see at the journal have a difference.i have tried it this way:
x=y+bsinh(cy)=>x/2+x/2=y/2+c/2*exp(cy) + y/2+c/2*exp(-cy)

then i have equated
1) x/2=y/2+c/2*exp(cy)
2) x/2=y/2+c/2*exp(-cy)

and then i have solved both for y and might i say i linearly combined the two answers and came up with the one below,

y=1/c*W((bc)*exp(-bx))-1/c*W((bc)exp(bx))+2*x

in the paper i referred the answer is different it is:

y=1/c*W((bc/2)*exp(-bx))-1/c*W((bc/2)exp(bx))+x

i have done it again and again and i happen to tumble over to the same answer.

what do you say.
 
  • #8
Has anyone not been able to solve this problem?
 
  • #9
yoseph said:
Ok, I did try it using that way.but the result i got and the one i see at the journal have a difference.i have tried it this way:
x=y+bsinh(cy)=>x/2+x/2=y/2+c/2*exp(cy) + y/2+c/2*exp(-cy)

then i have equated (* I corrected a typo here *)
1) x/2=y/2+b/2*exp(cy)
2) x/2=y/2+b/2*exp(-cy)

I can't see how that last step is justified. You decomposed the LHS into two (equal) components and the RHS in two (unequal) components then you equated those components. How do you justify doing that?
 
  • #10
BTW. Neither of the solutions you posted (yours or the one quoted from the "paper") worked numerically for me when I took b=c=1 and a random value for x.
 
  • #11
This is the title of the paper" Exact analytical solution of channel surface potential as an explicit function of gate voltage in undoped-body MOSFETs using the Lambert W function and a threshold voltage definition therefrom"

Source: Solid-State Electronics, Volume 47, Number 11, November 2003 , pp. 2067-2074(8)

I have seen the result it does give a solution,the curve looks like an extended "s" and "b &c"
are not one in the real problem,if that might make a difference.
 
  • #12
Yes you are correct.there is no justification.

any idea how?
 
  • #13
Without seeing the derivation my best guess is that despite the title of "Exact analytical solution" that their solution makes some approximation (like some term being small compared with the others etc) to come up with an approximate solution that is fairly accurate for certain ranges of parameters (b,c) and/or varialbe x . Like I said before, you can easily test their quoted "solution" numerically (pick any numbers you like for b,c,x) and it simply doesn't work.
 

1. What is the purpose of solving the equation x=y+bsinh(cy)?

The purpose of solving this equation is to find the value of x that satisfies the equation when given a specific value for y, b, and c. It can also be used to find the relationship between x and y when the other variables are known.

2. How do I solve for x in this equation?

To solve for x, you will need to use algebraic manipulation and the appropriate rules of logarithms and exponentials. First, isolate the term containing x on one side of the equation. Then, use logarithms to remove the exponential term. Finally, solve for x by isolating it on one side of the equation.

3. Is there a specific method or formula I should use to solve this equation?

Yes, there is a specific method for solving this type of equation called the logarithmic method. It involves using logarithms to remove the exponential term and then applying algebraic manipulation to solve for x.

4. Can I use a calculator to solve this equation?

Yes, you can use a calculator to solve this equation, but it is recommended to have a basic understanding of logarithms and exponentials to accurately input the equation into the calculator and interpret the results.

5. Are there any restrictions on the values of y, b, and c in this equation?

Yes, there are certain restrictions on the values of y, b, and c in this equation. For example, the value of c cannot be equal to 0 since it would result in an undefined term. Additionally, the values of y and b should be chosen carefully to ensure that the equation has a solution for x.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
879
Replies
2
Views
125
Replies
4
Views
736
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
747
Replies
11
Views
960
  • General Math
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top