MHB Logarithm + Nepper's number Exercise

AI Thread Summary
To solve the equation 2e^(-x) = 3e^(0.1x), the first step is to manipulate the equation to isolate the exponential term. By multiplying through by e^x, the equation simplifies to 2 = 3e^(1.1x). Dividing both sides by 3 leads to (2/3) = e^(1.1x), which can be converted to logarithmic form as 1.1x = ln(2/3). Finally, solving for x gives x = ln(2/3) / 1.1. The discussion also touches on using LaTeX for formatting mathematical expressions.
Velo
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
" Solve the equation:

2e^(-x) = 3e^(0.1x) "

I've been fiddling around with this and I have no idea what I'm supposed to do. I know the final answer should be something like:
x = [(2/3)log e] / 1,1

The only step I've managed to do was:
(2/3) x e^(-x) = e^(0.1x)

But after that, I don't know how to get the x out of the exponential.. Help would be appreciated :')
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
We are given to solve:

$$2e^{-x}=3e^{0.1x}$$

My first step would be to multiply though by $e^x\ne0$ to get:

$$2=3e^{1.1x}$$

Now divide though by 3:

$$\frac{2}{3}=e^{1.1x}$$

Next, what do you get when converting from exponential to logarithmic form?
 
Hm...

1.1x = log e ^ (2/3) <=>
x = [log e ^ (2/3)]/1.1 <=>
x = [(2/3) log e]/1.1

Which was the solution :o Is that right? Also, sorry, I'm having trouble using the latex thingy ><
 
Velo said:
Hm...

1.1x = log e ^ (2/3) <=>
x = [log e ^ (2/3)]/1.1 <=>
x = [(2/3) log e]/1.1

Which was the solution :o Is that right? Also, sorry, I'm having trouble using the latex thingy ><

Let's go back to:

$$\frac{2}{3}=e^{1.1x}$$

Now recall that:

$$a=b^c\implies c=\log_b(a)$$

And so we may write:

$$1.1x=\ln\left(\frac{2}{3}\right)$$

And then on dividing though by 1.1, we get:

$$x=\frac{\ln\left(\dfrac{2}{3}\right)}{1.1}$$

To use $\LaTeX$, you need to enclose your code with tags. The simplest way is to click the $\Sigma$ button on our toolbar, and then the cursor will be located in between the resulting $$$$ tags, and you can add your code there. You will find most symbols/commands you need to the right of the editor, in the "Quick $\LaTeX$" tool, and you can get quick previews of your code in our "$\LaTeX$ Live Preview" tool.
 
Ohhh, I get it now.. I read the book wrong too :') The solution had $$ \log_e(\frac{2}{3}) $$ and not $$\log(\frac{2}{3})$$.. I spent so much time wondering where that log had come from :') I tried redoing that exercise and the next in my notebook and I'm doing alright now x3 Thank you very much! :D
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...
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