Is there a way of approximating e^-x for large x

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Chain
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around approximating the function e^-x for large values of x, particularly in the context of evaluating an integral related to the probability of an electron in the ground state of hydrogen being more than 1 meter away from the nucleus. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and exploratory approaches to approximation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to evaluate an integral involving e^-x for large x and requests approximation methods.
  • Another participant suggests that e^(-x) can be expressed in a form that separates variables, potentially simplifying the approximation.
  • A specific integral is presented, which includes parameters related to the hydrogen atom, prompting further discussion on its evaluation.
  • One participant notes that the integral can be solved analytically, mentioning integration by parts and computer algebra packages as potential methods.
  • Another participant proposes that for large x, the exponential function decreases rapidly, allowing for simplifications in the integral's evaluation.
  • A mathematical transformation of e^-x into a logarithmic form is provided, indicating a method for handling large x values.
  • A question is raised about the applicability of Gauss–Laguerre quadrature for approximating the integral.
  • A participant acknowledges realizing the integral could be solved analytically and shares a rough approximation result.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying approaches to approximating e^-x, with some suggesting analytical solutions while others focus on numerical approximations. There is no consensus on a single method, and multiple viewpoints remain regarding the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the behavior of the exponential function at large x are made, but these are not universally agreed upon. The discussion also reflects a dependency on the specific parameters of the integral and the context of the problem.

Chain
Messages
35
Reaction score
3
I'm trying to evaluate an integral with e^-x where x is huge in the domain of the integral so I can't evaluate it numerically without making an approximation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you add more context? There might be a clever way to approximate e^(-x), but if that value is not added to something, e^(-x)=e^(-x-x0)*e^(x0) where the second factor is independent of x and the first factor can be chosen to be about e^0.
 
The integral is 4*(r^2)*exp(-2*r/a)/a^3 integrated between 1 and ∞ (The probability an electron in the ground state of hydrogen is more than 1 metre away from the nucleus) a=0.529*10^-10
 
Note that your integrand is one you can anti-differentiate without much trouble, so you can get the exact answer. (e.g. integration by parts. Or computer algebra package)
 
If you just want an estimate: The exponential will drop very quick, so regions with r>1m+eps are irrelevant and r^2 is nearly constant and =1m^2. Therefore, the integral is simply 4m^2/a^3 * exp(-2r/a) which can be evaluated as 2m^2/a^2 * exp(-2m/a) ≈ 8*10^20 * exp(-4*10^10) ≈ 10^(-10^10) where the last approximation is very rough.
 
e-x = 10-0.43429448190325x. The constant is log10e.

Using the above for large x, you can separate the integer and fractional parts of the exponent. I assume you know how to proceed from here.
 
Are you talking about Gauss–Laguerre quadrature?

\int_0^\infty f(x) e^{-x} \mathop{\text{dx}}\sim \sum_{i=1}^n w_i f(x_i)

where xi are zeros of a Laguerre polynomial and

w_i=\frac{x_i}{(n+1)^2[L_{n+1}(x_i)]^2}
 
Fair enough, yeah I realized after posting this the integral could be solved analytically >__< and I got a valule of something like 10^(-10^10) but thanks for the responses :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K