Finding inverse of a function involving ln.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the inverse of the function f(x) = 5 + ln(-2x + 3). The inverse is derived by rearranging the equation and swapping x and y, leading to the expression y = (-1/2) * [exp(1)^(x-5) - 3]. However, when plotted using Maple, the functions do not appear to be true inverses, prompting a deeper examination of the geometric properties of inverses. The conversation highlights the importance of correctly interpreting the definitions and properties of logarithmic and exponential functions. Ultimately, a reminder of these foundational concepts aids in understanding the relationship between a function and its inverse.
sp09ta
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
1. Plot f(x)=5+ln(-2x+3), and its inverse.



2. I know the inverse of ln(x) is exp(1)^(x)., and to find the inverse of a function, solve for x then swap the x and y.



3. y=5+ln(-2x+3)
y-5=ln(-2x+3)
exp(1)^(y-5)=(-2x+3)
(-1/2)*[exp(1)^(y-5)-3]=x

y=(-1/2)*[exp(1)^(x-5)-3]

However when I plot these functions using maple, I notice that they are definitely not inverse... :( what am i doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks good (although it beats me why you write exp(1)^p instead of just exp(p) or e^p).
How can you "see" that they are not inverses?
If you plug x = (-1/2)*[exp(y-5)-3]=x into 5+ln(-2x+3), you get y right?
 
Oh, I guess my theory on the geometry of inverses was a little off. I write exp(1)^p because its the maple command that I was using. Thanks for your comment!
 
Hehe, you're welcome.
Sometimes all you need is a little reminder on the definitions :)
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...
Back
Top