How can Lambert's equation be used to solve for x?

  • Thread starter Thread starter psyclone
  • Start date Start date
psyclone
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I had a little problem which I'd like to have answered by anyone who has a-little time to spend!

How to solve for x, given the following;

2Ln(x+4)+1=x ?

the solutions are x= -3.91.. & 5.50..

Wolfram-alpha solves the problem using 'Lamberts W-function', which makes sense because using the inverse property of logs with exponents will not simplify this problem at all.

But by using Using Lambert's Transcendental Equation, with the correct substitution of 'x' for another variable say 'u', I think it can be solved.

Ln u = a u^b {b = 1}

solution: u = exp [ -W(-a*b)/b ] , where W( ) is Lambert's W-function.

Your thoughts?

{http://mathworld.wol...W-Function.html }
{http://mathworld.wol...alEquation.html }
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since the given equation involves "ln" and Lambert's W function solves xe^x= constant, I would get the logarithm alone, then take the exponential of both sides. First simplify: 2ln(x+ 4)= x- 1 so ln(x+ 4)= (x- 1)/2. Then x+ 4= e^{(x- 1)/2}= e^{x/2}e^{-1/2} and write that as (x+ 4)e^{-x/2}= e^{-1/2}.

Now, let u= x+ 4 so that x= u- 4 and e^{-x/2}= e^{-(u- 4)/2}= e^{-u/2}e^{2}. In terms of u, the equation is now ue^{-u/2}e^{2}= e^{-1/2} or ue^{-u/2}= e^{-2- 1/2}= e^{-5/2}. Finally, let v= -u/2. Then u= -2v so we have -2ve^v= e^{-5/2} or ve^v= -\frac{e^{-3/2}}{2} and v= W\left(-\frac{e^{-3/2}}{2}\right)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thx for your post.
but..
W(-1/(2e^(-3/2))) should be W(-1/(2e^(-5/2))),
but your working is correct!
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top