Is this possible without a calculator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Procrastinate
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculator
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving an optimization problem where the derivative R' is given as (1-lnx)/x^2. The key point is that R' equals zero at stationary points, leading to the equation 0 = (1-lnx)/x^2. The participant successfully determined that x = 2.71 is the solution, which corresponds to the natural logarithm's base e. They express difficulty in solving it manually due to the presence of zero in the equation, despite using the null factor law. The conclusion confirms that x = e is indeed the correct answer.
Procrastinate
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
I was doing this problem about optimization and I derived it to:

R' = (1-lnx)/x2

(This was the right derivative by the way as the maximum on the R function was the same answer as when R' = 0)Anyways as R' = 0 when stationary points occur:

0 = (1-lnx)/x2

I was wondering whether it was possible to do that without the help of a graph/graphics calculator because of the zero there. I managed to get the correct answer which was x=2.71 but I couldn't do it manually because of the zero even when I used the null factor law (1-lnx) = 0 or 1/x2 = 0.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
2.718281828... is the base of the natural log.

Plug ln(x) = 2.718281828 into your calculator. The answer should be close to 1.
 
Procrastinate said:
I was doing this problem about optimization and I derived it to:

R' = (1-lnx)/x2

(This was the right derivative by the way as the maximum on the R function was the same answer as when R' = 0)


Anyways as R' = 0 when stationary points occur:

0 = (1-lnx)/x2

(1-lnx) = 0 or 1/x2 = 0.

1-lnx=0 or lnx = 1

lnx = \log_e{x} = 1

It is true when x = e = 2.71.
 
Thank you.
 
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...
Back
Top