MHB How to change the subject when exponential is involved

AI Thread Summary
Making Pr(x) the subject of the equation T = S [(1-Pr(x))^N] + Pr(x) is challenging, especially since N is not necessarily an integer. For N ≥ 5, the equation becomes a polynomial of at least the fifth degree, which typically lacks analytic solutions. Numerical solutions and approximations are likely necessary to find Pr(x). Alternatively, the equation can be rearranged to involve the Lambert W function, although this may not be practical for most calculators. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the complexity of solving for Pr(x) in this context.
MWD02
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
It's been a long time since I've worried about this - but could someone help me make Pr(x) the subject (I can't remember if it's possible, if it's not, I'd love a brief explanation):

T = S [(1-Pr(x))^N] + Pr(x)

Thanks in advance!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Sorry, I should mention N isn't necessarily an integer.
 
MWD02 said:
It's been a long time since I've worried about this - but could someone help me make Pr(x) the subject (I can't remember if it's possible, if it's not, I'd love a brief explanation):

T = S [(1-Pr(x))^N] + Pr(x)

Thanks in advance!

MWD02 said:
Sorry, I should mention N isn't necessarily an integer.

Hi MWD02! Welcome to MHB! ;)

Even if $N$ would be an integer, for $N\ge 5$ this is a polynomial of at least the 5th degree with at least 3 terms, for which there are typically no 'analytic' solutions.
So I think we're stuck with numerical solutions, meaning we have to make approximations. (Worried)
 
Ah I was afraid someone would use the word "approximations"!... Oh well, I'll see what I can do for my particular problem.

Thanks very much for the reply! :D
 
Well, you probably could (I won't try to do it) rearrange the equation so the solution can be written in terms of the "Lambert W function" (defined as the inverse function to f(x)= xe^x) but then your calculator probably does not have a "W function" key!
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top