E to the -y plus trial and error math?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhanthomJay
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error trial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the equation 3e^{-.5y} + 3e^{-y} + 3e^{-1.5y} + 103e^{-2y} = 98.39 for the variable y. Participants explore various methods for finding solutions, including trial and error, substitution, and numerical methods, while discussing the nature of the solutions, including real and complex roots.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a trial and error approach is necessary to solve for y.
  • Another participant proposes substituting u for e^{-1/2 y}, leading to a quartic equation that has an exact solution.
  • A different viewpoint states that while there is an exact solution, solving quartics is complex and may require numerical methods like Newton's method or the secant method.
  • Some participants note issues with numerical methods, indicating that Newton's method may not perform well for this problem due to the function being nearly flat in certain ranges.
  • Corrections are made regarding the substitution variable, clarifying that x should be defined as exp(-y/2) rather than exp(y/2).
  • One participant shares their experience of obtaining complex conjugate pairs and real roots through numerical methods, while discussing the implications of rejecting negative solutions for real solutions.
  • Another participant mentions that if complex solutions are allowed, each solution generates an infinite family of complex solutions.
  • A final post states that the answer provided in a text example was y = 0.0677.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the best approach to solve the equation, with some advocating for numerical methods and others emphasizing the existence of an exact solution. The discussion includes both real and complex solutions, indicating that there is no consensus on which solutions to prioritize or how to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of solving quartic equations and the potential issues with numerical methods, highlighting that the behavior of the function can complicate finding real solutions. There are also discussions about the implications of allowing complex solutions.

PhanthomJay
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
7,201
Reaction score
527
A co worker has the following equation:

[itex]3e^{-.5y} +3e^{-y} + 3e^{-1.5y} + 103e^{-2y} =98.39[/itex]

Solve for y.

Some sort of compound interest bond equation I am told, or something like that.

He has been told that to solve for y, one must use a trial and error approach.

True??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you substitute u for [itex]e^{- \frac {1}{2} y}[/itex] you get a quartic equation, for which an exact solution exists. Type the equation in WolframAlpha to get a meaningless jumble of really large numbes and lots of square and cube root signs.

It's less work to solve the quartic with a numerical method like Newton's method than to use the formula for the quartic equation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
There is an exact solution. Let ##x=\exp(y/2)##. Then your equation is equivalent to ##103x^4+3x^3_3x^2_3x-98.39=0##. This is a quartic equation, so it is solvable, exactly. Then solve for y. Simple!

Not so simple. Solving cubics is a bear of a problem. Solving quartics? That's a megafauna bear of a problem. Solving this numerically is non-trivial. Newton's method doesn't work very well on this problem. You need to use something else such as [strike]the secant method[/strike] the midpoint method.

Edit: The secant method doesn't work very well here either because f(x) is almost flat between -1 and +1.
 
Last edited:
willem2 and DH...thanks! This forum is loaded with some very brilliant minds. He couldn't find an answer anywhere on-line or from his college finance professors, so I told him not to worry, I would get an answer through the best site on the web.

Thanks again!
 
D H said:
There is an exact solution. Let ##x=\exp(y/2)##. Then your equation is equivalent to ##103x^4+3x^3_3x^2_3x-98.39=0##. This is a quartic equation, so it is solvable, exactly. Then solve for y.
Massive typos there. I should have said

Let ##x=\exp(-y/2)##. Then your equation is equivalent to ##103x^4+3x^3+3x^2+3x-98.39=0##.
 
D H said:
Massive typos there. I should have said

Let ##x=\exp(-y/2)##. Then your equation is equivalent to ##103x^4+3x^3+3x^2+3x-98.39=0##.
Yes, I realized that afterwards..thanks for the correction!
 
willem2 said:
If you substitute u for [itex]e^{- \frac {1}{2} y}[/itex] you get a quartic equation, for which an exact solution exists. Type the equation in WolframAlpha to get a meaningless jumble of really large numbes and lots of square and cube root signs.

It's less work to solve the quartic with a numerical method like Newton's method than to use the formula for the quartic equation.

I attempted this method and received reasonable answers of a complex conjugate pair and two real roots. However you obviously cannot ln a negative number which reduces the outcome to three possibilities. Once divided buy the -0.5, ending up with y=0.0677, 0.008-∏i and -13.807+∏i
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Quagz said:
I attempted this method and received reasonable answers of a complex conjugate pair and two real roots. However you obviously cannot ln a negative number which reduces the outcome to three possibilities. Once divided buy the -0.5, ending up with y=0.0677, 0.008-∏i and -13.807+∏i
You can reject the negative solution to ##3(x+x^2+x^3)+103x^4=98.39## (and also the two complex solutions) if you are looking for a real solution to the original equation. You cannot reject that negative solution if you allow complex solutions to the original equation. In fact, each of the four solutions to the polynomial generates an infinite family of complex solutions to the original equation. If some complex valued ##y## is a solution to that original equation, then so is ##y+4k\pi## for any integer k.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The answer given in the text example was in fact y = .0677
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
10K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K