How Do You Prove the Given Approximation Formula Involving e^{-t/τ}?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving an approximation formula involving the exponential function \( e^{-t/\tau} \) and its relation to two parameters \( \tau_1 \) and \( \tau_2 \). Participants explore the mathematical reasoning behind the approximation, including conditions under which it holds true.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests neglecting the smaller of \( \tau_1 \) or \( \tau_2 \) to simplify the expression, implying that a larger value leads to a larger exponential for positive \( t \.
  • Another participant provides a detailed mathematical manipulation of the formula, indicating that if \( \tau_1 \) is much greater than \( \tau_2 \), certain terms become negligible, leading to an approximation.
  • Several participants express that the provided analysis does not address the original problem, indicating a misunderstanding of the question's requirements.
  • A participant clarifies that the right-hand side of the equation is \( e^{-t/\tau} \) with \( \tau = \tau_1 + \tau_2 \), suggesting that this formulation could still be relevant to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct approach to proving the approximation formula. There are multiple interpretations of the problem, and some participants believe the analysis provided does not adequately address the original question.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the conditions under which the approximation holds, particularly the relationship between \( \tau_1 \) and \( \tau_2 \). The discussion reflects differing interpretations of the problem statement and the mathematical steps involved.

anhnha
Messages
179
Reaction score
1
Hi.
Please help me prove the approximation formula below given in my book. This is not homework question.
Thanks.

attachment.php?attachmentid=69383&stc=1&d=1399188366.jpg
 

Attachments

  • approximation formula proof.jpg
    approximation formula proof.jpg
    22.2 KB · Views: 532
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You just neglect ##\tau_1## or ##\tau_2##, whatever is smaller. Note that a larger value will lead to a larger exponential as well (for positive t).
 
Thank you. However, that doesn't solve the problem. What need to be proved is different.
 
[tex]\frac{τ_1e^{-\frac{t}{τ_1}}-τ_2e^{-\frac{t}{τ_2}}}{τ_1-τ_2}=\frac{e^{-\frac{t}{τ_1}}-(τ_2/τ_1)e^{-\frac{t}{τ_2}}}{1-(τ_2/τ_1)}=e^{-\frac{t}{τ_1}}\left(\frac{1-(τ_2/τ_1)e^{-t(\frac{1}{τ_2}-\frac{1}{τ_1})}}{1-(τ_2/τ_1)}\right)=e^{-\frac{t}{τ_1}}\left(\frac{1-(τ_2/τ_1)e^{-t\frac{(τ_1-τ_2)}{τ_1τ_2}}}{1-(τ_2/τ_1)}\right)[/tex]

If τ1>>τ2, then [itex]e^{-t\frac{(τ_1-τ_2)}{τ_1τ_2}}<1[/itex].

From this, it follows that, in the numerator, [itex](τ_2/τ_1)e^{-t\frac{(τ_1-τ_2)}{τ_1τ_2}}<<1[/itex]

Also, in the denominator, [itex](τ_2/τ_1)<<1[/itex]

So the term in parenthesis approaches unity.

Chet
 
anhnha said:
Thank you. However, that doesn't solve the problem. What need to be proved is different.
Why? It shows that the big [/size] is a correct approximation.
 
I guess the analysis I did in #4 did not work for the OP? (It was just a more fleshed-out version of what mfb was saying).

Chet
 
Thank you all.
I think you misread the question a bit. The expression on the right hand side of the equation is [tex]e^{-\frac{t}{τ}}[/tex] with [tex]τ = τ_1 + τ_2[/tex].
 
anhnha said:
Thank you all.
I think you misread the question a bit. The expression on the right hand side of the equation is [tex]e^{-\frac{t}{τ}}[/tex] with [tex]τ = τ_1 + τ_2[/tex].
You're right. But that doesn't matter much. The same general procedure could be used for this.

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K