E^y + e^-y =2x or e^2y - 2xe^y + 1 = 0 equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter thenewbosco
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the transformation of the equation e^y + e^-y = 2x into e^(2y) - 2xe^y + 1 = 0. Participants are encouraged to analyze the components of the first equation to identify how to introduce e^(2y). Clarifications are made regarding the notation, emphasizing that e^(2y) is distinct from (e^2)y. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the relationships between the terms to facilitate the conversion. Overall, the thread seeks to clarify the mathematical steps involved in this transformation.
thenewbosco
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
In this textbook i am looking at it says:

"Thus e^y + e^-y =2x or

e^2y - 2xe^y + 1 = 0"

how did they go from the first to the second part?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, look at pieces of the equation and see if that gives you any clues.

For example, their second equation has an e^(2y) in it1. Can you think of anything to do to the first equation so that the result will have an e^(2y) in it?

1: I assume you meant e^(2y) and not e^2y (which is the same as (e^2)y)
 
You should really try to figure this out yourself. What's the difference between the two equations?
 
i still don't get how to go from

e^y + exp(-y)=2x

to

e^2y - 2xe^y + 1 = 0

help please
 
I'm not sure, but that y should be raised too...e^(2y) not (e^2)y
 
Have you tried any of our hints?
 
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...
Back
Top