Lagrange multiplier problem - function of two variables with one constraint

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving the Lagrange multiplier problem for the function f(x,y) = 2x² + 4y² - 4xy - 4x, constrained by the circle defined by g(x,y) = x² + y² = 16. Participants computed the partial derivatives, leading to the equations 4x - 4y - 4 = 2λx and 8y - 4x = 2λy. The critical points identified were (1, √15) and (√15, 1), but further clarification was needed on solving the resulting system of equations. The consensus is to eliminate λ from the equations for a more straightforward solution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrange multipliers
  • Proficiency in calculating partial derivatives
  • Familiarity with solving systems of equations
  • Knowledge of constraints in optimization problems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the method of Lagrange multipliers in detail
  • Practice solving optimization problems with multiple constraints
  • Learn techniques for eliminating variables in systems of equations
  • Explore applications of Lagrange multipliers in real-world scenarios
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in calculus, mathematicians focusing on optimization, and anyone interested in advanced mathematical problem-solving techniques.

abery
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the maximum and minimum values of f(x,y) = 2x^2+4y^2 - 4xy -4x
on the circle defined by x^2+y^2 = 16.


Homework Equations


Lagrange's method, where f_x = lambda*g_x, f_y= lambda*g_y (where f is the given function and g(x,y) is the circle on which we are looking for the extrema)


The Attempt at a Solution


Computed the partials, and was able to end up with an equation like 2y -2 = [itex]\lambda[/itex]*(x-y)

From this, critical points look like they might be (1, root 15) and (root 15, 1) but this does not seem to be the answer.

Any help at all is much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, it would have helped if you had show precisely what you did, not just generalities. "end up with an equation like 2y -2 = λ *(x-y)". Actually, I think you have f and g reversed but it really doesn't matter whether you use [itex]f_x= \lambda g_x[/itex] or [itex]g_x=(1/\lambda) f_x[/itex]

[itex]f(x,y)= 2x^2+ 4y^2- 4xy- 4x[/itex] and [itex]g(x,y)= x^2+ y^2= 16[/itex].
so [itex]f_x= 4x- 4y- 4[/itex] and [itex]g_x= 2x[/itex]. Your first equation is [itex]4x- 4y- 4= 2\lambda x[/itex]. [itex]f_y= 8y- 4x[/itex] and [itex]g_y= 2y[/itex]. Your second equation is [itex]8y- 4x= 2\lambda y[/itex]. Those, together with the condition that [itex]x^2+ y^2= 16[/itex], give you three equations to solve for x, y, and [itex]\lambda[/itex].

But the value of [itex]\lambda[/itex] is not really necessary to solve this problem and I find that it is often best to eliminate [itex]\lambda[/itex] from the first two equations by dividing one by the other.
 
Thanks for your help, HallsOfIvy. My problem is with solving the resulting system of equations. (Thanks for the suggestion to divide the equations)

After doing that and rearranging the first two, I get: x2 - xy -y2 - y =0

And using the third (original) constraint, I get -2y2 - xy - y - 16 = 0, but am not sure how to proceed.


HallsofIvy said:
Well, it would have helped if you had show precisely what you did, not just generalities. "end up with an equation like 2y -2 = λ *(x-y)". Actually, I think you have f and g reversed but it really doesn't matter whether you use [itex]f_x= \lambda g_x[/itex] or [itex]g_x=(1/\lambda) f_x[/itex]

[itex]f(x,y)= 2x^2+ 4y^2- 4xy- 4x[/itex] and [itex]g(x,y)= x^2+ y^2= 16[/itex].
so [itex]f_x= 4x- 4y- 4[/itex] and [itex]g_x= 2x[/itex]. Your first equation is [itex]4x- 4y- 4= 2\lambda x[/itex]. [itex]f_y= 8y- 4x[/itex] and [itex]g_y= 2y[/itex]. Your second equation is [itex]8y- 4x= 2\lambda y[/itex]. Those, together with the condition that [itex]x^2+ y^2= 16[/itex], give you three equations to solve for x, y, and [itex]\lambda[/itex].

But the value of [itex]\lambda[/itex] is not really necessary to solve this problem and I find that it is often best to eliminate [itex]\lambda[/itex] from the first two equations by dividing one by the other.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K