Re-arranging equation: negative time for exponential

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving the equation 10000=100(1+e^(kt)+e^(2kt)+...+e^(39kt)) with k set to -4.7947012×10^(-3). The re-arrangement leads to a negative time value, which is deemed valid given the negative k. The conversation highlights the existence of an analytical solution through geometric series, leading to a degree 40 polynomial that complicates the solution process. Numerical methods are suggested as a more feasible approach for solving the polynomial.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of exponential functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with geometric series and their summation formulas
  • Knowledge of polynomial equations and numerical methods for solving them
  • Basic calculus concepts, particularly differentiation and logarithms
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of geometric series and their applications in calculus
  • Learn about numerical methods for solving polynomial equations, such as Newton's method
  • Explore the implications of negative growth rates in exponential decay models
  • Investigate analytical solutions for higher-degree polynomials and their limitations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying calculus and differential equations, and professionals working with exponential decay models in fields such as physics and engineering.

jackscholar
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
1. Homework Statement
I have a sequence whereby
10000=100(1+e^(kt)+e^(2kt)+...+e^(39kt)) where k=-4.7947012×10^(-3) which was dervied from dy/dt=ky
Re-arranging i get 99=1+e^(kt)+e^(2kt)+...+e^(39kt), letting e^(kt)=r I put it into the computer and
i get 1.04216=r=e^-4.7947012×10^(-3)t
taking ln of both sides and dividing by the number gives a negative time value. Any help is highly appreciate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With a negative k, t has to be negative, too. That is a correct solution of the equation. If a negative time value is impossible, your equation (or k) has to be wrong.

There is an analytic solution, by the way.
 
Analytical, how so?
 
Is it by stating that, if assuming that all doses haven't decayed, the maxmimum amount is 3900 only.
 
With r=e^(kt), your equation gets 99=r^0 + r^1 + r^2 + ... + r^39
That is a geometric expression, and has a nice formula.
 
mfb said:
With r=e^(kt), your equation gets 99=r^0 + r^1 + r^2 + ... + r^39
That is a geometric expression, and has a nice formula.

Right. And that gives you a degree = 40 polynomial to solve---not easy at all, and I doubt there is an analytical formula for its solution.
 
Hmm, you are right. Well, at least it is easier to solve it numerically that way (which does not matter if a computer solves it).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K