How Do You Solve a Hyperbolic Function Using Natural Logs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KatieLynn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Natural
AI Thread Summary
To solve the hyperbolic function e^x - e^-x = -2 using natural logs, one cannot directly take the logarithm of both sides due to the negative value on the right side, as the natural log is undefined for negative numbers. Instead, the equation can be transformed by multiplying both sides by e^x, leading to a quadratic form y^2 - 2y = 1, where y = e^x. Completing the square on this quadratic gives y = 1 ± √2, and only the positive solution is valid since e^x must be greater than zero. Finally, taking the natural log of the positive solution yields the correct expression in natural logs.
KatieLynn
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



e^x - e^-x all divided by 2 = -1
express answer in natural logs

Homework Equations



No equations, just properties of logs and natural logs

The Attempt at a Solution



First, I multiplied everything by 2


e^x - e^-x = -2

then i took the natural log of both sides and brought down the exponent

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = -2

so you can simplify that i think to

2xLn(e) = -2

so x= -2/(2Lne)

which Lne is 1 so

x=-2/1

x=-2?

I don't think that's right because it says express answer in natural logs so it should simplify out that easily.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you missed something.

When you turn
e^x - e^-x = -2

into

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = -2

the -2 is part of it too. So it should be

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = Ln(-2)
 
KatieLynn said:

Homework Statement



e^x - e^-x all divided by 2 = -1
express answer in natural logs

Homework Equations



No equations, just properties of logs and natural logs

The Attempt at a Solution



First, I multiplied everything by 2


e^x - e^-x = -2

then i took the natural log of both sides and brought down the exponent

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = -2

so you can simplify that i think to

2xLn(e) = -2

so x= -2/(2Lne)

which Lne is 1 so

x=-2/1

x=-2?

I don't think that's right because it says express answer in natural logs so it should simplify out that easily.

sourlemon said:
I think you missed something.

When you turn
e^x - e^-x = -2

into

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = -2

the -2 is part of it too. So it should be

(x)Ln(e) + (x)Ln(e) = Ln(-2)
Unfortunately you are both wrong. You can't just "turn e^x- e^-x= -2 into Ln(e^x)+ Ln(e^-x)".

You can't "take the natural logarithm of both sides because, as sourlemon said, you must also take the natural logarithm of -2 and that is not defined: the domain of Ln(x)is "all positive x". Even if it were +2 on the right side, Ln(x+ y) is NOT Ln(x)+ Ln(y).

Instead, go back to e^x- e^-x= -2 and multiply both sides by e^x: (e^x)^2- 1= 2(e^x) or y^2- 1= 2y (taking y= e^x) so y^2- 2y= 1. You can solve that by completing the square on the left: y^2- 2y+ 1= (y-1)^2= 2 so y= 1\pm\sqrt{2}.
Once you have e^x= 1+ \sqrt{2}, then take the Ln of both sides. (Do you see why e^x= 1- \sqrt{2} is not possible?

I beat you Compuchip!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also note that in general, log(a + b) is not equal to log(a) + log(b). For example, log(1 + 0) = log(1) = 0 =/= log(1) + log(0) = -\infty. There is just a rule saying that log(a * b) = log(a) + log(b). Instead, multiply both sides by e^x and first solve it for y = e^x as a quadratic expression. Then you can take the logarithm.

[edit]Wow, you are fast :smile:[/edit]
 
I think you can't do e^x= 1- \sqrt{2} because it would be a negative answer and logs have to be greater than zero.I understand how you solved the problem but I was never taught to do it that way, are there other way to solve the problem other than completing the square?

Is it possible to factor it?
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
44
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top