MHB Determine the position using an iteration method

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method Position
AI Thread Summary
The function f(x) has a unique position \overline{x} greater than 1 where it equals f(1). The calculation of f(1) results in \frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}. To find \overline{x}, an iteration method is suggested, with Newton's method being a viable option. Starting with an initial guess of x_0=1.5, the method converges to approximately 1.41 after several iterations. The final result indicates that the position \overline{x} is 1.41, confirming the accuracy of the calculations.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

The function \begin{equation*}f(x)=\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}\end{equation*} has at exactly one position $\overline{x}>1$ the same value as at the position $x=1$. Determine the position $\overline{x}$ using an iteration method with accuracy of two decimal digits. I have done the following:

We have that \begin{equation*}f(\overline{x})=f(1)\Rightarrow f(\overline{x})-f(1)=0 \Rightarrow g(x):=f(x)-f(1)\end{equation*}

First we have to calculate $f(1)$:
\begin{align*}f(1)&=\lim_{x\rightarrow 1}f(x)=\lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}=\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}\ \overset{DLH}{ = } \ \frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{\pi \cos \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{1}\\ & =\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \pi \cos \left (\pi \cdot 0\right )=\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \pi =\frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}\end{align*}

Therefore we get the function \begin{equation*}g(x)=\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}-\frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}\end{equation*}

Now we have to apply an iteration method to approximate the root of that function, right? Do we use the Newton's method? (Wondering)

We don't have an interval to which the root will belong, we only know that it is greater than $1$. So do we have to guess such an interval to calculate the first input $x_0$? (Wondering)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
Hey! :o

The function \begin{equation*}f(x)=\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}\end{equation*} has at exactly one position $\overline{x}>1$ the same value as at the position $x=1$. Determine the position $\overline{x}$ using an iteration method with accuracy of two decimal digits. I have done the following:

We have that \begin{equation*}f(\overline{x})=f(1)\Rightarrow f(\overline{x})-f(1)=0 \Rightarrow g(x):=f(x)-f(1)\end{equation*}

First we have to calculate $f(1)$:
\begin{align*}f(1)&=\lim_{x\rightarrow 1}f(x)=\lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}=\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}\ \overset{DLH}{ = } \ \frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \lim_{x\rightarrow 1}\frac{\pi \cos \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{1}\\ & =\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \pi \cos \left (\pi \cdot 0\right )=\frac{1}{e^{1/9}}\cdot \pi =\frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}\end{align*}

Therefore we get the function \begin{equation*}g(x)=\frac{x}{e^{x/9}}\cdot \frac{\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )}{x-1}-\frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}\end{equation*}

Now we have to apply an iteration method to approximate the root of that function, right? Do we use the Newton's method? (Wondering)

We don't have an interval to which the root will belong, we only know that it is greater than $1$. So do we have to guess such an interval to calculate the first input $x_0$? (Wondering)

[DESMOS=-1,4,-1,4]\frac{\left(x\sin\left(\pi\left(x-1\right)\right)\right)}{e^{x/9}(x-1)}[/DESMOS]
The above graph shows that the function repeats its value at $x=1$ when $x$ is somewhere near $1.4$ or $1.5$. So I would take $x_0=1.5$.
 
Last edited:
mathmari said:
Now we have to apply an iteration method to approximate the root of that function, right? Do we use the Newton's method?

We don't have an interval to which the root will belong, we only know that it is greater than $1$. So do we have to guess such an interval to calculate the first input $x_0$?

Hey mathmari!

This is an example where Newton-Raphson can have problems if we are not careful.
If we pick a starting value that is too far from the zero, it will likely not converge.
However, a starting value that starts slightly to the right of the zero, such as the 1.5 that Opalg pointed out, should do the job. And it will converge quadratically.
Starting below 1.4 or above 2.1 will likely diverge though. (Wondering)

Alternatively algorithms are bisection and regula falsi.
First we might search for values that are on opposite sides of the x-axis.
That is, we can start with some initial interval, and then either double or half its size until we find both a positive and a negative function value.
The root must then in between those, after which both bisection and regula falsi will find it. (Thinking)
 
We have \begin{align*}&g(x)=\frac{x\sin \left (\pi(x-1)\right )}{e^{x/9}(x-1)}-\frac{\pi}{e^{1/9}}\\ &g'(x)=\frac{\left [\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right )+x\pi \cos \left (\pi (x-1)\right )\right ]\left (x-1\right )-x\sin \left (\pi (x-1)\right ) \frac{8+x}{9}}{e^{x/9}(x-1)^2}\end{align*}

Choosing as initial value $x_0=1.5$ we get the following:
\begin{align*}x_1=x_0-\frac{g(x_0)}{g'(x_0)}\approx 1.4259 \\ x_2=x_1-\frac{g(x_1)}{g'(x_1)}\approx 1.4149 \\ x_3=x_2-\frac{g(x_2)}{g'(x_2)}\approx 1.4147\end{align*}
The first two decimal digits are the same as in the previous step and so position that we are looking for is $1.41$. Is everything correct? (Wondering)
 
Yep. (Nod)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top