How to Solve Exponential Equations with Different Bases?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nae99
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves solving the exponential equation 4(3^(2x+1)) + 17(3^x) - 7 = 0, which falls under the subject area of exponential equations with different bases.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the expansion of terms and the use of substitution, specifically suggesting y = 3^x to simplify the equation. There are questions about how to correctly expand and rewrite the terms, as well as confusion regarding notation and algebraic manipulation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering guidance on how to approach the equation and clarifying misunderstandings. There is a focus on forming a quadratic equation from the exponential equation, and some participants are exploring different interpretations of the steps involved.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding algebraic errors and notation, as well as the need for clarity on the substitution process. The discussion reflects a collaborative effort to navigate the complexities of the problem without arriving at a definitive solution.

nae99
Messages
129
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



4(3^2x+1) + 17(3^x) - 7 = 0


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



4 + 17 (3^2x+1+x) - 7 = 0
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am assuming your problem reads:

4(32x+1) + 17(3x) - 7 = 0

In which case remember that am+n=aman and amn = (am)n.

So after you expand out the first term you can use a substitution to solve for x such as y=3x.
 
rock.freak667 said:
I am assuming your problem reads:

4(32x+1) + 17(3x) - 7 = 0

In which case remember that am+n=aman and amn = (am)n.

So after you expand out the first term you can use a substitution to solve for x such as y=3x.

and how will i expand it...becaues i don't know how to
 
nae99 said:
and how will i expand it...becaues i don't know how to

Take the first term 4(32x+1) using the first rule I posted with am+n=aman, how can you rewrite 32x+1 as?
 
rock.freak667 said:
Take the first term 4(32x+1) using the first rule I posted with am+n=aman, how can you rewrite 32x+1 as?

so is it (3^2x)(3^1)
 
Yes. So following up on what rock.freak said, you will have

4(3)(32x)+17(3x)-7=0

So now, you will substitute y=3x. After that, you should be able to solve it.
 
Ivan92 said:
Yes. So following up on what rock.freak said, you will have

4(3)(32x)+17(3x)-7=0

So now, you will substitute y=3x. After that, you should be able to solve it.

i have no idea what to do next
 
32x = (3x)2

& 4(3) = 12

Now, does Ivan's suggestion make more sense to you?
 
SammyS said:
32x = (3x)2

& 4(3) = 12

Now, does Ivan's suggestion make more sense to you?

4(3)(3^2x)+17(3x)-7=0

32x = (3x)2

& 4(3) = 12
so after that would it be something like this:

12 + (3^x)^2 + 17(3x)-7=0
 
  • #10
You are not to add 12 but multiply it to the first term. I also noticed that your notation is a bit wrong. Your equation shouldould look like this:

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

Then do what rocky said earlier, which is y=3x. Then you should be able to see what you are to do next.
 
  • #11
Ivan92 said:
You are not to add 12 but multiply it to the first term. I also noticed that your notation is a bit wrong. Your equation shouldould look like this:

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

Then do what rocky said earlier, which is y=3x. Then you should be able to see what you are to do next.

then
12*17(3x)-7=0
 
  • #12
No, you would multiply 12 to the (3x)2.

Where ever you see 3x you substitute in y. When you do that, you should form a quadratic equation. Then do what is necessary to solve it.

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

Here is the equation again.
 
  • #13
Ivan92 said:
No, you would multiply 12 to the (3x)2.

Where ever you see 3x you substitute in y. When you do that, you should form a quadratic equation. Then do what is necessary to solve it.

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

Here is the equation again.

so should it be this
(36x)2 + (51x)-7=0


which would be
36x^2 + 51x - 7=0
 
  • #14
You just did a common algebraic error:

a(bx) [itex]\neq[/itex](ab)x

Just simply put in y for where ever you see 3x. Then do what I told you before.
 
  • #15
Ivan92 said:
You just did a common algebraic error:

a(bx) [itex]\neq[/itex](ab)x

Just simply put in y for where ever you see 3x. Then do what I told you before.

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

so are you saying i should do this:

12(y)2+17(y)-7=0
 
  • #16
Ivan92 said:
No, you would multiply 12 to the (3x)2.

Where ever you see 3x you substitute in y. When you do that, you should form a quadratic equation. Then do what is necessary to solve it.

12(3x)2+17(3x)-7=0

See this equation as corrected by Ivan:

[tex]12(3^x)^2+17(3^x)-7=0[/tex]

Everyplace you see [itex]3^x[/itex] in the equation, replace it with [itex]y\,.[/itex]

You should obtain a quadratic equation, but the variable is y instead of the usual x which you are more accustomed to.

The expression on the left hand side of your new equation can be factored, which should lead to a solution. Alternatively, you should be able to solve it using the quadratic formula.

Added in Edit:

I see you got the quadratic equation while I was entering my post. I'm a slow typist.
 
  • #17
SammyS said:
See this equation as corrected by Ivan:

[tex]12(3^x)^2+17(3^x)-7=0[/tex]

Everyplace you see [itex]3^x[/itex] in the equation, replace it with [itex]y\,.[/itex]

You should obtain a quadratic equation, but the variable is y instead of the usual x which you are more accustomed to.

The expression on the left hand side of your new equation can be factored, which should lead to a solution. Alternatively, you should be able to solve it using the quadratic formula.

ok understand now, so i would be

12y^2+17y-7=0
 
  • #18
Yep. So now all you would have to do now is solve for y. Then when you solve for y, replace y with 3x then solve for x.
 
  • #19
Ivan92 said:
Yep. So now all you would have to do now is solve for y. Then when you solve for y, replace y with 3x then solve for x.

i solve foe y but how should i replace it with 3x

for eg. y= 1.75
would it then be
3x=1.75
 
  • #20
Yes, exactly and then use logs to solve it.
 
  • #21
BloodyFrozen said:
Yes, exactly and then use logs to solve it.

so is it
x= log3 1.75
 
  • #22
nae99 said:
i solve foe y but how should i replace it with 3x

for eg. y= 1.75

Not quite.

I get two solutions for y.

One of them is -7/4 which is equal to -1.75.

What's the other solution?
 
  • #23
SammyS said:
Not quite.

I get two solutions for y.

One of them is -7/4 which is equal to -1.75.

What's the other solution?

the other solution is y=0.333
 
  • #24
Actually it's y = 1/3, which is good, because that can be written as 3-1.

So, all you have to do for this solution to y is to solve: [itex]3^x = 3^{-1}\,.[/itex]

Can you solve that for x?
 
  • #25
SammyS said:
Actually it's y = 1/3, which is good, because that can be written as 3-1.

So, all you have to do for this solution to y is to solve: [itex]3^x = 3^{-1}\,.[/itex]

Can you solve that for x?

yes
recall: a^m = a^n, m=n

[itex]3^x = 3^{-1}\,.[/itex]
then x= -1
 

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K