Lambert W Function: Solving for the Inverse of x^x = y

  • Thread starter Thread starter arpon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Homework
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the inverse of the function f(x) = x^x, noting that there is no closed form expression for it. It highlights the use of the Lambert W function, which is the inverse of the function f(x) = xe^x. By taking the logarithm of both sides of the equation x^x = y, the transformation leads to the equation u e^u = ln(y), where u = ln(x). This allows for the solution x = exp(W(ln(y))). The Lambert W function thus provides a method to express x in terms of y for the original equation.
arpon
Messages
234
Reaction score
16
If, ##f(x)=x^x##, then, f-1(x)=?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't think there's a closed form expression for that.
 
Nicely done! I misread your answer at first and thought you had it wrong but saw that you are correct after working it out for myself. The Lambert W function is inverse to f(x)= xe^x but taking the logarithm of both sides of x^x= y gives xln(x)= ln(y) not xe^x= y.

Instead, once you have xln(x)= ln(y), let u= ln(x). Of course, then, x= e^{ln(x)}= e^u so the equation becomes
ue^u= ln(y), u= ln(x)= W(ln(y)) so that, as you say, x= exp(W(ln(y)).
 
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...
Back
Top