Optimize f(x,y,z) = 2x + 2y + 2z

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter squenshl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around optimizing the function f(x,y,z) = 2x + 2y + 2z under the constraints g(x,y,z) = x² - y² - z² - 1 = 0 and h(x,y,z) = x² + y² + z² - 17 = 0. Participants explore the method of Lagrange multipliers and the derivation of critical points.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equations Lx = 2 + 2λx - 2μx = 0, Ly = 2 + 2λy - 2μy = 0, and Lz = 2 + 2λz - 2μz = 0 as part of the optimization process.
  • Another participant challenges the correctness of Lx, suggesting it should be 2 + 2λx + 2μx = 0, leading to different equations for x, y, and z.
  • There is a proposal to eliminate variables by adding the constraints, resulting in a simplified equation for x, and deriving values for y and z based on this.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the formulation of L(x,y,z,λ,μ) and its implications for Lx, suggesting it might not affect the final results.
  • Another participant questions the necessity of finding λ and μ, noting they are not part of the original problem but can be derived once x, y, and z are known.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the correct formulation of Lx and the implications for the optimization process. There are competing views on the necessity and method of finding λ and μ.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the signs of terms in the equations and the implications of those signs on the optimization process. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the Lagrange multiplier method.

squenshl
Messages
468
Reaction score
4
Optimize f(x,y,z) = 2x + 2y + 2z subject to constraints g(x,y,z) = x2 - y2 - z2 - 1 = 0 & h(x,y,z) = x2 + y2 + z2 - 17 = 0.

I found Lx = 2 + 2[tex]\lambda[/tex]x - 2[tex]\mu[/tex]x = 0, Ly = 2 + 2[tex]\lambda[/tex]y - 2[tex]\mu[/tex]y = 0 & Lz = 2 + 2[tex]\lambda[/tex]z - 2[tex]\mu[/tex]z = 0
I'm just asking how to use Lx, Ly & Lz to eliminate [tex]\lambda[/tex] & [tex]\mu[/tex] to get the critical points.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Your "Lx" is incorrect. Because x2 is positive in both f and g, it should be [itex]2+ 2\lambda x+ 2\mu x= 0[/itex]

Those reduce very easily to [itex](\mu+ \lambda)x= -1[/itex], [itex](\mu- \lambda)y= -1[/itex] and [itex](\mu- \lambda)z= -1[/itex]. Also, just adding the two constraints eliminates both y and z giving [itex]2x^2- 18= 0[/itex] so [itex]x= \pm 3[/itex]. Divide the second equation by the third to get y/z= 1 so y= z. Put that into [itex]x^2- y^2- z^2- 1= 0[/itex] to get [itex]9- 2z^2= 1[/itex] so [itex]2z^2= 8[/itex] and [itex]z= \pm 2[/itex]. The function is optimized at (3, 2, 2), (-3, 2, 2), (3, -2, -2), and (-3, -2, -2).
 
Last edited by a moderator:


But I thought L(x,y,z,[tex]\lambda[/tex],[tex]\mu[/tex]) = 2x + 2y + 2z - [tex]\lambda[/tex](x2 - y2 - z2 - 1) - [tex]\mu[/tex](x2 + y2 + z2 - 17) making x2 both negative making Lx = 2 - 2[tex]\lambda[/tex]x - 2[tex]\mu[/tex]x. But I don't think it matters in the end result.
 
Last edited:


What if I wanted to find [tex]\lambda[/tex] & [tex]\mu[/tex]?
 


squenshl said:
But I thought L(x,y,z,[tex]\lambda[/tex],[tex]\mu[/tex]) = 2x + 2y + 2z - [tex]\lambda[/tex](x2 - y2 - z2 - 1) - [tex]\mu[/tex](x2 + y2 + z2 - 17) making x2 both negative making Lx = 2 - 2[tex]\lambda[/tex]x - 2[tex]\mu[/tex]x. But I don't think it matters in the end result.
It just changes the values of [itex]\lambda[/itex] and [itex]\mu[/itex].

squenshl said:
What if I wanted to find [tex]\lambda[/tex] & [tex]\mu[/tex]?
Why would you? They are never part of the original problem. But if you do, once you have found x, y, and z, you can substitute those back into the equations to find [itex]\lambda[/itex] and [itex]\mu[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K