1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Newton's Method

  1. Oct 10, 2007 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    A (area) = [tex]\int^{e}_{1}[/tex] ln(x) dx = 1

    Now we let k be such that 0 [tex]\leq[/tex] k [tex]\leq[/tex]1

    Consider the line y = k.

    Find k so that area computed by A is exactly one half.

    2. Relevant equations

    So, first, I found point of intersection:

    k = ln (x)

    e[tex]^{k}[/tex] = x​

    Now I have:

    1/2 = [tex]\int^{e}_{e^{k}}[/tex] ln (x) dx​

    3. The attempt at a solution

    I'm having a hard time grasping the big picture of this, that's pretty much why I'm stuck. I know that Newton's Method is used to find the roots of a function, but this area twist is really giving me a hard time. I'm supposed to use N.M. to solve for k after setting up integral to compute A/2. THEN I have to experiment to find 2A/3 and A/1000. Can anyone enlighten me? Where is this zero happening?? Am I supposed to use [tex]\int[/tex] ln (x) -k dx??

  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 10, 2007 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The problem, as stated, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The "area computed by A" does not depend on k. Do you mean to say that y= k divides the area computed by A in half? That's different from saying that [itex]\int_{e^k}^e ln(x)dx= 1/2[/itex] which has nothing to do with A.

    In any case, you will have to integrate [itex]\int ln(x) dx[/itex]. Can you do that?
  4. Oct 10, 2007 #3
    I copied the problem verbatim from the handout I was given, so I'm sorry that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to you...

    Yes, I mean to say that the line y = k splits the area in half. And yes, I know how to integrate ln(x), but it doesn't do me a whole lot if I don't know what I'm doing. :eek:(

    So I have:

    [tex]\int^{e}_{e^{k}}[/tex] ln (x) dx = x ln x - x ][tex]^{e}_{e^{k}}[/tex]

    = ( e ln(e) - e ) - (e[tex]^{k}[/tex] ln(e[tex]^{k}[/tex] )

    = (e*1 -e) - ( e[tex]^{k}[/tex]*k)

    = - ( e[tex]^{k}[/tex]*k)
    Since that integral is equal to 1/2 (since the line cuts it in half)

    1/2 = -k * e[tex]^{k}[/tex]

    0 = -k * e[tex]^{k}[/tex] - 1/2 <--- Is this supposed to be the equation I use N.M. on?
  5. Oct 10, 2007 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    You forgot the "-x". the integral is
    [tex]-ke^k+ e^k[/tex]
    and so this is [itex]e^k(1-k)[/itex]
    No, because you neglected the "-x" your equation is
    [tex] e^k (1-k)= 1/2[/tex]
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2007
  6. Oct 10, 2007 #5
    Ok, yeah, that makes sense. So now,

    [tex]k - ( e^k (1-k) ) / d/dk ( e^k (1-k) ) [/tex] ​

    should give me what k converges to, meaning the value of k that when 1/2 is subtracted, equals to zero, right??

    So for 2/3, I'd use this equation to solve for k using Newton's method,
    [tex] e^k (1-k)= 2/3 [/tex] ​

    and for 1/1000,
    [tex] e^k (1-k)= 1/1000 [/tex]​

    Am I on the right track?
  7. Oct 10, 2007 #6

    Gib Z

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Are you 100% sure that your original integral wasn't [tex]\int^e_1 \frac{1}{x} dx = 1[/tex] instead? Because [tex]\int^e_1 \log x dx = -1[/tex] in case you didn't check with the anti derivative... Also the integral of 1/x from t to 1, wrt t, is a common definition of the natural logarithm, so you might have just typed down something you were thinking about a few lines ahead. Just check up on the question.
  8. Oct 11, 2007 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Since log(x) (ln(x)) is positive for x> 1, how do you get -1 as its integral? I get 1 for the integral!
  9. Oct 11, 2007 #8

    Gib Z

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    That's a good point...

    [tex]\int^e_1 \log x dx = x(\log x -1) \right|^e_1 = e(1-1) - 1(\log 1 -1)= 0 - (\log 1 -1) = 1[/tex]..

    Great, just great, i forgot the brackets on the log 1 -1 when I was doing it in my head, now i've made an ass of myself =]. Please ignore any thing i have said.
  10. Oct 11, 2007 #9
    So I am on the right track?
  11. Oct 11, 2007 #10

    Gib Z

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Yes probably, seeing as Halls is helping you
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Newton's Method
  1. Newton's method (Replies: 10)

  2. Newtons method? (Replies: 2)

  3. Newton's method (Replies: 3)

  4. Newton's Method (Replies: 3)

  5. Newton method (Replies: 3)