Rearrange for x. Is this even possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter OrganDonor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    even Rearrange
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenge of rearranging an equation derived from an MRI signal equation to find the maximum point of f(x). The original poster expresses uncertainty about whether it is possible to isolate x in the given equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore whether algebraic rearrangement is feasible, with suggestions to simplify the equation and consider special functions like the Lambert W function. There are also mentions of using plotting techniques to visualize solutions.

Discussion Status

The conversation includes various perspectives on the problem, with some participants suggesting specific algebraic manipulations and others proposing numerical or graphical methods. There is no explicit consensus on a single approach, but multiple avenues for exploration have been identified.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the equation and the potential need for iterative methods or special functions, indicating that traditional algebraic techniques may not suffice. The discussion also acknowledges the constraint of x not being equal to zero in certain manipulations.

OrganDonor
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Homework Statement



I'm working on a problem related to an MRI signal equation. Essentially I want to derive an equation that can tell me the point at which f(x) is maximum. I have differentiated with respect to x and double checked that there are no errors.

But now I am stumped at how to rearrange for x. Or even if it is possible to rearrange for x. Here is the equation:

Homework Equations



0 = ax-1.5 + be-cx * (cx-0.5 + 0.5x-1.5)

The Attempt at a Solution



Is it possible to rearrange for x? If so what technique should be used? I am happy to have a go at doing the algebra myself but I'm completely stumped!

Any help will be greatly appreciated :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, there's no algebraic way to rearrange this. You could simplify it greatly by multiplying through by x1.5. If c is small you could expand the exponential as a power series, multiply out, discard terms beyond x2, and solve the quadratic. You could then improve on that by iterative methods.
 
As haruspex said, you can start by multiplying through by [itex]x^{1.5}[/itex] to get [itex]0= a+ be^{-cx}(cx+ 0.5)[/itex]. If you let y= bcx+ 0.5b, x= ((y/b)- 0.5)/c the equation becomes [itex]0= a+ ye^{y/bc}e^{0.5/c}[/itex]. Divide both sides by bc and you have [itex]0= a/bc+ (y/bc)e^{y/bc}e^{0.5/c}[/itex] which is the same as [itex](y/bc)e^{y/bc}= -ae^{-0.5/c}/bc[/itex].

Let z= y/bc and it becomes [itex]ze^x= -ae^{-0.5/c}/bc[/itex]. The solution to that is [itex]z= y/bc= W(-ae^{-0.5/c}/bc)[/itex] so that [itex]y= bcx+ 0.5b=bcW(-ae^{-0.5/c}/bc)[/itex] and [itex]x= W(-ae^{-0.5/c}/bc)- 0.5/c[/itex].

There "is no algebraic way to rearrange this" because W, the "Lambert W function", used above, is not an "elementary function". It is defined as the inverse function to [itex]f(x)= xe^x[/itex].
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alternate Solution

Apart from using special functions you can use plotting techniques to obtain elements in the solution set.

Solve the equation into two functions of x on either side of the equal sign.

-ax^-1.5/ (cx^-.5+.5x^-1.5)= be^-cx

This can be simplified to

-a/(cx+.5)= be^-cx taking that x≠0 (which is a solution in itself).

Plotting these two functions on the same axes will show the intersections of the graph i.e. where they are equal to each other.

Like I said, this is just an alternate way to doing this problem without knowledge of special functions (but with knowledge of some language like maple or mathematica).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K