Finding a Real Solution for a Complex Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nusc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Positive Value
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding a positive real value for the variable x in a complex equation involving square roots and polynomial expressions. The original poster expresses doubt about the possibility of finding such a solution, given the constraints that x cannot be complex or zero.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the clarity of the equation's formatting and question the necessity of finding the solution. Some suggest simplifying the expression or using numerical methods, while others discuss the implications of the double equal sign in the equation. There are attempts to reduce the equation to a cubic form and inquiries about the methods for solving it.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with various interpretations and approaches being discussed. Some participants have provided guidance on numerical methods and simplifications, while others express uncertainty about the transcription of the original equation. There is no explicit consensus on the best approach or the validity of the assumptions made.

Contextual Notes

There are concerns about the clarity and accuracy of the original equation, with participants noting potential transcription errors and the need for balanced parentheses. The original poster's requirement for a positive real solution adds a layer of complexity to the discussion.

Nusc
Messages
752
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



I need to find a positive REAL value x such that

[tex] \frac{2-(4+x^2-x\sqrt (4+x^2) \sqrt (\frac{2+x^2+x\sqrt 4+x^2 }{8+2x^2})}{4\sqrt (4+x^2) } == 0[/tex]

x cannot be complex or zero! So far, I don't even think its possible.

Any suggestions?

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The formatting on that is not very clear. But why do you need that? Is this the solution to some more basic problem?
 
Is that not good enough?
 
Nusc said:
Is that not good enough?

It is now, sort of. Wasn't before. I'm still curious why. If I'm reading it right, then x=0 doesn't work anyway, correct?
 
Last edited:
You're right in this case.
 
Well I could reduce it to [tex]x^3 -3x^2 -4=0[/tex]

Since I don't know how to solve for exact solutions, I used http://www.1728.com/cubic.htm
and it appears that x= 3.3553013976081196 would be an approximate answer.

I noticed there is a double equal sign ('==') in the expression. Does that mean anything?
 
Really checked through your transcription? - I mean they usually don't give questions with messy answers. In real life yes, but not so often in textbooks.

Is
[tex]\frac{2-(4+x^2-x\sqrt (4+x^2) \sqrt (\frac{2+x^2+x\sqrt (4+x^2) }{8+2x^2})}{4\sqrt (4+x^2) } == 0[/tex]

a bit nearer by any chance?:smile:
 
Defennder said:
Well I could reduce it to [tex]x^3 -3x^2 -4=0[/tex]

Since I don't know how to solve for exact solutions, I used http://www.1728.com/cubic.htm
and it appears that x= 3.3553013976081196 would be an approximate answer.

I noticed there is a double equal sign ('==') in the expression. Does that mean anything?

That's strange, I got mine to cancel out which is what I expected.

So nevermind.
 
Defennder said:
Well I could reduce it to [tex]x^3 -3x^2 -4=0[/tex]

Since I don't know how to solve for exact solutions, I used http://www.1728.com/cubic.htm
and it appears that x= 3.3553013976081196 would be an approximate answer.

I noticed there is a double equal sign ('==') in the expression. Does that mean anything?

Actually I was wrong, how did you simplify it to a cubic?
 
  • #10
If you plot that function in mathematica, from say 0-5 you can find values of x that would yield an approximate answer to 0.

Does anyone know of a way to get the best possible result?
 
  • #11
The cubic has an exact solution, you can look it up or you can just use Newton's method to find an approximate solution.
 
  • #12
The function I'm trying to approximate is not a cubic, I'm just wondering how the other guy got it. The function of interest is at the top. What's better in this case Bisection or Newton?
 
  • #13
Have you tried solving for x? You haven't even simplified your expression! Throw the denominator away, and notice that there are two square root factors on one of the terms that cancel each other (up to a factor of 1/2). I could tell you what they are, but I would prefer to figure out what I'm talking about.

Once you do that it's easy to isolate the square root term and then square both sides of the equation. You will have either a cubic or a quartic.
 
  • #14
I'm not entirely sure I interpreted your expression correctly. For one thing, is it supposed to be [itex]\sqrt{4+x^2}[/itex] or [itex]\sqrt{4} + x^2[/itex]? It appears it should be the former. In that case, it's best written as

[tex]\frac{2-(4+x^2-x\sqrt{4+x^2} \sqrt{\frac{2+x^2+x\sqrt{4+x^2} }{2(4+x^2)}}}{4\sqrt{4+x^2}} = 0[/tex]

Again, what does the double equal sign '==' mean?

Assuming my interpretation of your expression is correct, this time it reduces to [itex]2x^4+5x^2+4=0[/itex].

That gives [tex]x^2=-\frac{5}{4} \pm \frac{\sqrt{7}}{4}i[/tex]

Finding the square roots of these would hence give you 4 solutions. But then again you mentioned that you thought that x cannot be complex. Is that something stated by the question?
 
  • #15
Use some numerical method:
Newton doesn't look good here
Bisection ..
or some good one
 
  • #16
From a programming prospective a single equal sign is an assignment operator that gives the value of the right side to the left, and a double equal sign is a comparison operator that returns a value of true if the two sides are indeed equal.
 
  • #17
Ballance the parentheses in the numerator so that the expression is unambiguous.
 
  • #18
Below is my MAPLE procedure but it gives me values that are very large...

restart;
bisection := proc (f1, c, d, TOL, N0)
local f, a, b, p, i, j, k;
f := f1;
p := evalf((1/2)*c+(1/2)*d);
a := c;
b := d;
i := 1;
j := 0;
k := 1;
while j = 0 and k <= N0 do
if evalf(f(a)*f(p)) < 0 then b := evalf(p)
else a := evalf(p) end if;
print(k);
print("Value of P:");
print(p);
if abs(f(p)) < TOL or N0 <= i then printf("Procedure completed successfully. Approximate value of P:"), P;
j := 1 end if;
k := k+1;
i := i+1;
p := evalf((1/2)*a+(1/2)*b)
end do
end proc

What can be done to improve the code?
 
  • #19
The double equal sign is used in Mathematica to indicate an equation. I plotted the left side of the equation and found it asymtotic to the x axis, which indicates that there is no solution. That's no help with the algebra I know, and I may have transcribed the equation incorrectly..But that's that for what it's worth.
 
  • #20
It's not asymptotic to the x-axis... Try -1000..1000
 
  • #21
you have to write one?!
Why don't simply use built in procedures (obviously they are superior)?

matlab:
>> syms x;
>> f = (2-(4+x^2-x*sqrt(4-x^2)*sqrt((2+x^2+2*x+x^2)/(8+2*x^2))))/(4*sqrt(4+x^2));
>> solve(f,x)

ans =

1.0042365002824003967092316690056-1.0497367979853078503097252196741*i
1.0042365002824003967092316690056+1.0497367979853078503097252196741*i
 
Last edited:
  • #22
Oh that's cool. I should acquaint myself with MATLAB... But it appears that function is irrelevant now as I realized something.
For example, a function say
[tex] Sin^2[\frac{1+\sqrt{5}t}{2}][/tex]
is not periodic. It will never reach 1 or 0 after t.

[tex] \frac{1}{4(4+x^2)^{3/2}}(2*\sqrt{4+x^2}*Cosh[t x](2+(2+x^2)Cosh[t\sqrt{4+x^2}])-2((2+x^2)\sqrt{4+x^2}+2\sqrt{4+x^2}Cosh[t\sqrt{4+x^2}+x(4+x^2)Sinh[t x]Sinh[t \sqrt{4+x^2}][/tex]
How do you make complicated functions periodic?
 
Last edited:
  • #23
The original post was looking for a real solution
 
  • #24
Also...the parentheses in the initial expression have not yet been ballanced. An assumption must be made as to where the missing ")" goes. In these situations one wonders if the problem has been transcribed incorrectly from a text and the authors solution is to a different problem.
 
  • #25
-Log[Exp[i*t*x]]==0
Exp[-Log[Exp[i*t*x]]]==0
Exp[-i*t*x]==Exp[0]
Exp[-i*t*x]==1
Log[Exp[-i*t*x]]==Log[1]
Log[Exp[-i*t*x]]==0

Is this correct, I need to find a solution to the first expression.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K