Can Initial Guesses Improve Newton-Raphson's Root Predictions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter danong
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Newton
AI Thread Summary
Initial guesses for the Newton-Raphson method can significantly impact convergence, but predicting these roots accurately remains challenging. The discussion highlights that using plain substitution to find estimated roots can be time-consuming and inefficient. A graphical approach using complex planes reveals that small variations in initial estimates can lead to drastically different convergence outcomes. The fractal nature of root convergence illustrates the complexity of the boundaries between different root behaviors. Ultimately, while initial guesses can improve predictions, the process is inherently complex and may not yield precise results without extensive computation.
danong
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Uhm i mean, actually how do we predict the estimated roots before we implement this?

Because i wonder if the estimated root is too big enough to predict and sometimes time-consuming, is there any way to predict the roots better and accurate before we implement the Newton Raphson's iterative methods? I am using plain subsitution into the function which sometimes have to check through all the numbers in order to get one estimated root beforehand.


Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Daniel.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
We can't. One of the most famous "fractals" is the graph formed by looking at the three roots of z3= 1. These are, of course, 1, -(1/2)+ i\sqrt{3}/2, and -(1/2)-i\sqrt{3}/2. Treat the x,y-plane as the complex plane, (x,y) corresponding to x+ iy. Taking each x+ iy as the "initial estimate" for Newton-Raphson, color the point "red", "blue", "green", or "black" according to whether the sequence converges to 1, -(1/2)+ i\sqrt{3}/2, and -(1/2)-i\sqrt{3}/2, or does not converge respectively. You will see large patches of "red", "blue", and "green" close to those respective roots but the boundary is extremely complex ("fractal"). In fact, every boundary point is a boundary point of all four sets simultaneously. It is possible that very tiny variations in choice of initial point will cause the iteration to converge to a different answer, or not converge at all.

(By the way, when I first programmed a computer (with a "graphics" terminal) to do that, it took almost an hour. Now the same program runs in less that 10 seconds!)
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top