Analytic Solution to ##x^{\alpha} +x =1##?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bob012345
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analytic solution
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether there is an analytic solution to the equation ##x^{\alpha} + x = 1##, where ##\alpha## is a constant. Participants explore various approaches to finding a closed-form solution, including considerations of specific cases and the implications of different values of ##\alpha##.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that there is generally no analytic solution for the equation, particularly for cases where ##\alpha \geq 5##.
  • Others suggest that for certain integer values of ##\alpha## (specifically ##\alpha \in \{0,1,2,3,4\}##), solutions can be found using roots.
  • A participant proposes that for non-integer values of ##\alpha##, the situation may be more complex and invites discussion on the potential for solutions using the W function.
  • One participant notes that the equation can be rearranged to solve for ##\alpha## given any ##x##, leading to the expression ##\alpha = \frac{log(1-x)}{log(x)}##.
  • Another participant highlights the challenges of solving the equation due to the mixture of multiplication and addition, which complicates the problem.
  • Some participants mention specific values of ##\alpha##, such as negative integers and fractions, where polynomial solutions may exist.
  • There is a discussion about a related equation, ##a^y + b^y = 1##, and how it can be transformed into the original equation.
  • Participants explore the implications of the restrictions on polynomial degrees and the nature of the coefficients involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there is no analytic solution for many cases, particularly for higher integer values of ##\alpha##. However, there are multiple competing views regarding specific cases, non-integer values, and the potential for solutions using different mathematical approaches. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of solutions for all possible values of ##\alpha##.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the conditions under which solutions may exist, particularly regarding the nature of ##\alpha## (integer vs. non-integer) and the implications of polynomial degree restrictions. The discussion includes references to specific mathematical theorems and transformations that may or may not apply to the problem.

bob012345
Gold Member
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
1,054
TL;DR
Is there an analytic solution to the simple equation ##x^{\alpha} +x =1## where ##\alpha## is a constant ?
Is there an analytic solution to the simple equation ##x^{\alpha} +x =1##? I can get to a solution by iteration or by graphical methods but I wish to find a closed form exact solution. ##\alpha## is a constant. I tried to put it into a form where I could use the quadratic formula but that didn't work i.e something like ##c^{2\beta} + c^{\beta} =1##. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Mathematics news on Phys.org
bob012345 said:
Summary: Is there an analytic solution to the simple equation ##x^{\alpha} +x =1## where ##\alpha## is a constant ?

Is there an analytic solution to the simple equation ##x^{\alpha} +x =1##? I can get to a solution by iteration or by graphical methods but I wish to find a closed form exact solution. ##\alpha## is a constant. I tried to put it into a form where I could use the quadratic formula but that didn't work i.e something like ##c^{2\beta} + c^{\beta} =1##. Thanks.
There is generally no analytic solution. E.g. consider the case ##\alpha=7## then ##x^7+x-1=0## cannot be solved analytically.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, Delta2 and bob012345
fresh_42 said:
There is generally no analytic solution. E.g. consider the case ##\alpha=7## then ##x^7+x-1=0## cannot be solved analytically.
Thanks. I suppose it is the same if ##\alpha## is less than 2 with the obvious exceptions of 0, and 1? My interest in this question is non-integer exponents.
 
bob012345 said:
Thanks. I suppose it is the same if ##\alpha## is less than 2 with the obvious exceptions of 0, 1 and 2?
There is a theorem that says that there are no solutions with radicals (##\sqrt[n]{.}##) for arbitrary integer polynomials of degree ##5## or higher. We can solve it for ## \alpha \in \{0,1,2,3,4\}## by roots. So ##\alpha \geq 5## has good chances of not being solvable. And what about non-integer values?
 
fresh_42 said:
There is a theorem that says that there are no solutions with radicals (##\sqrt[n]{.}##) for arbitrary integer polynomials of degree ##5## or higher. We can solve it for ## \alpha \in \{0,1,2,3,4\}## by roots. So ##\alpha \geq 5## has good chances of not being solvable. And what about non-integer values?
Well, turning the problem around it is easy to solve for ##\alpha## given any ##x##.

$$\large x^{\alpha} + x=1$$

$$ \alpha log(x) = log (1-x)$$

$$\alpha = \large \frac{log(1-x)}{log(x)}$$

I just thought one might be able to transform the equation around to solve for ##x## given an ##\alpha## for this specific equation form by some kind of substitution.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
bob012345 said:
Well, turning the problem around it is easy to solve for ##\alpha## given any ##x##.

$$\large x^{\alpha} + x=1$$

$$ \alpha log(x) = log (1-x)$$

$$\alpha = \large \frac{log(1-x)}{log(x)}$$

I just thought one might be able to transform the equation around to solve for ##x## given an ##\alpha## for this specific equation form.
If you put it that way, we are given an equation with only one occurrence of the variable, so that we only have ##c_{1}^\alpha = c_{2}## which is basically the definition of the logarithm.

The problem with ##x^\alpha +x-1=0## when we ask for ##x## is, that we have a mixture of some arbitrary multiplication and a few simple additions. Whenever multiplication and addition meet, things get complicated. There is actually only one single law that combines them:
$$
a\cdot (b+c) = a\cdot b + a \cdot c
$$
That's it. It is all we have. And every combination of the two that differs from the distributive law is a complex problem, in our case literally complex.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and bob012345
All alpha values where I see a solution:

##\alpha \in \{-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4\}## as we get a solvable polynomial, multiply by powers of x for negative ##\alpha##.
##\alpha \in \{-\frac 1 3, -\frac 1 2, \frac 1 2, \frac 1 3, \frac 1 4\}## as we get a solvable polynomial in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th root of x.
For ##\alpha=5+6z## for integer z, ##e^{\pm \pi i/3}## is a solution. There is no general closed solution for polynomials of that degree, but some special cases can still have closed solutions.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, bob012345 and Delta2
Where this was all coming from is from a similar equation used to derive it
$$\large a^y + b^y =1$$ where ##a,b## are constants and I let ##\large x= b^y## then we can write ##\large a^y = b^{\alpha y} = (b^y)^{\alpha} = x^{\alpha}## giving $$\large x^{\alpha} + x=1$$

I suppose the first form is just as problematic.
 
bob012345 said:
I suppose the first form is just as problematic.
Yes. Can you at least say where ##a,b,y## are taken from?
 
  • #10
fresh_42 said:
Yes. Can you at least say where ##a,b,y## are taken from?
Yes, there was a problem but in its original form used ##x## which goes as $$16^x + 20^x =25^x$$ solve for ##x##. I divided both sides by ##25^x##.



I solved that exactly analytically but then wanted to generalize the coefficients a bit.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
\begin{align*}
16^x+20^x=25^x &\Longleftrightarrow (5^x-4^x)(5^x+4^x)=4^x\cdot 5^x \\
&\Longleftrightarrow \left(\left(\dfrac{1}{4}\right)^x-\left(\dfrac{1}{5}\right)^x\right)
\left(\left(\dfrac{1}{4}\right)^x+\left(\dfrac{1}{5}\right)^x\right) =1\\
&\Longleftrightarrow \left(\dfrac{1}{4^x}\right)^2+1^2=\left(\dfrac{1}{5^x}\right)^2
\end{align*}
is a very specific form: ##(a^x)^2+1^2=(b^x)^2.## Now we have a quadratic equation and we can e.g. look for Pythagorean triples that are all known.

As a rule of thumb, you can say that, whenever there are symmetries, then there is a good chance to solve a system.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby and bob012345
  • #12
fresh_42 said:
There is a theorem that says that there are no solutions with radicals (##\sqrt[n]{.}##) for arbitrary integer polynomials of degree ##5## or higher. We can solve it for ## \alpha \in \{0,1,2,3,4\}## by roots. So ##\alpha \geq 5## has good chances of not being solvable. And what about non-integer values?
Is that no Real solutions? Is ##\alpha## Real? How about Complex ones? Seems like something like the W function may work?
 
  • #13
WWGD said:
Is that no Real solutions? How about Complex ones? Seems like something like the W function may work?
This is irrelevant. ##p(x)\in \mathbb{Z}[x]## is the restriction.
 
  • #14
fresh_42 said:
This is irrelevant. ##p(x)\in \mathbb{Z}[x]## is the restriction.
But ##Z[x]## refers to polynomials, doesn't it? So we assume ##\alpha \in \mathbb Z##?
 
  • #15
bob012345 said:
Well, turning the problem around it is easy to solve for ##\alpha## given any ##x##.

$$\large x^{\alpha} + x=1$$

$$ \alpha log(x) = log (1-x)$$

$$\alpha = \large \frac{log(1-x)}{log(x)}$$

I just thought one might be able to transform the equation around to solve for ##x## given an ##\alpha## for this specific equation form by some kind of substitution.
That will require ##x>1##. And I assume you want to solve for ##x##, not for ##\alpha##.
 
  • #16
You mean for the problem here? No, we didn't assume anything. Integers are simply a domain we know something about.
 
  • #17
fresh_42 said:
\begin{align*}
16^x+20^x=25^x &\Longleftrightarrow (5^x-4^x)(5^x+4^x)=4^x\cdot 5^x \\
&\Longleftrightarrow \left(\left(\dfrac{1}{4}\right)^x-\left(\dfrac{1}{5}\right)^x\right)
\left(\left(\dfrac{1}{4}\right)^x+\left(\dfrac{1}{5}\right)^x\right) =1\\
&\Longleftrightarrow \left(\dfrac{1}{4^x}\right)^2+1^2=\left(\dfrac{1}{5^x}\right)^2
\end{align*}
is a very specific form: ##(a^x)^2+1^2=(b^x)^2.## Now we have a quadratic equation and we can e.g. look for Pythagorean triples that are all known.

As a rule of thumb, you can say that, whenever there are symmetries, then there is a good chance to solve a system.
Yes, this was a special case since it could be reduced to a quadratic because of the specific values of the coefficients. BTW, the way I did it was divide by the RHS, combine to get

$$(16/25)^x + (20/25)^x =1$$ which is

$$(0.64)^x + (0.8)^x =1$$

which is $$(0.8^x)^2 + (0.8)^x =1$$ Then substituted ## z=0.8^x##

$$z^2 + z =1$$ which gives ##z= \frac{-1±5^{1/2}}{2}##

and ## x=\large \frac{log(z)}{log(0.8)}##Then, I wanted to see if I changed the 16 to say, 18, if it had an analytic solution. The answer is no in general.

$$18^x+20^x=25^x$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
  • #18
BTW, ##x= -∞## might work too for ##a^x + b^x = c^x##.
 
  • #19
bob012345 said:
BTW, ##x= -∞## might work too for ##a^x + b^x = c^x##.
As does ##x=+\infty ## but that should only be used if we explicitly state that hyperreal numbers are allowed. In any other, i.e. standard case, there is no number ##\pm \infty ## and we cannot pretend there was.
 
  • #20
bob012345 said:
BTW, ##x= -∞## might work too for ##a^x + b^x = c^x##.
In the sense that for ##a, b, c > 1##:$$\lim_{x \to -\infty} (a^x + b^x) = \lim_{x \to -\infty} (c^x) = 0$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bob012345

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
678
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K