Solve Exponential Equation: 2^x·ln(2)+3^x·ln(3)+4^x·ln(4) = 2x

  • Thread starter Thread starter juantheron
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponential
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the equation 2x·ln(2) + 3x·ln(3) + 4x·ln(4) = 2x. Participants analyze the function f(x) = 2x·ln(2) + 3x·ln(3) + 4x·ln(4) - 2x, concluding that it is strictly increasing and concave upwards. The use of the Mean Value Theorem (MVT) indicates that f'(x) = 0 has exactly one real root, confirming the existence of a solution for x > 0. However, the method to calculate the root of f(x) = 0 remains unclear to some participants.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of exponential functions and logarithms
  • Familiarity with calculus concepts such as derivatives and concavity
  • Knowledge of the Mean Value Theorem (MVT)
  • Ability to analyze the behavior of functions as x approaches infinity
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn numerical methods for finding roots of equations, such as the Newton-Raphson method
  • Study the properties of convex and concave functions in depth
  • Explore advanced calculus topics, particularly those related to optimization
  • Investigate graphical methods for visualizing function behavior and root finding
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, calculus students, and anyone interested in solving complex exponential equations or analyzing function behavior in real analysis.

juantheron
Messages
243
Reaction score
1
No. of Real solution of the equation ##2^x\cdot \ln (2)+3^x\cdot \ln (3)+4^x\cdot \ln (4) = 2x##

. The attempt at a solution

Let ##f(x) = 2^x\cdot \ln (2)+3^x\cdot \ln (3)+4^x\cdot \ln (4) -2x##

Here solution must be exists for ##x>0##, because for ##x\leq 0##, L.H.S>0 while R.H.S <0

##f^{'}(x) = 2^x\cdot \left(\ln 2\right)^2+3^x\cdot \left(\ln 3\right)^2+4^x\cdot \left(\ln 4\right)^2 - 2##

and ##f^{''}(x) = 2^x\cdot \left(\ln 2\right)^3+3^x\cdot \left(\ln 3\right)^3+4^x\cdot \left(\ln 4\right)^3 >0\forall x\in \mathbb{R}##

Means function ##f(x)## is Concave - Upward and ##f^{'}(x)## is Strictly Increasing function

and when ##x\rightarrow +\infty, f^{'}(x)\rightarrow \infty ## and when ##x\rightarrow -\infty, f^{'}(x)\rightarrow -\infty ##

So using LMVT, function ##f^{'}(x) = 0## has exactly one real root.

But I did not understand How can i calculate root of ##f(x) = 0##

Help please

Thanks in Advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
juantheron said:
and when ##x\rightarrow -\infty, f^{'}(x)\rightarrow -\infty ##
Are you sure about that?

But I did not understand How can i calculate root of ##f(x) = 0##
There isn't a real root, but even if there were, this analysis won't give you the value of the root(s).

Can you show that f'(x) crosses the x-axis only once? And also, since you've already shown that f''(x) > 0 for all x hence f(x) is concave upwards, what can you say about f(x) where x is the turning point (where f'(x)=0)?

If you can't quite understand this, picture a general parabola that's concave upwards. It's essentially the same problem.
 
juantheron said:
No. of Real solution of the equation ##2^x\cdot \ln (2)+3^x\cdot \ln (3)+4^x\cdot \ln (4) = 2x##

. The attempt at a solution

Let ##f(x) = 2^x\cdot \ln (2)+3^x\cdot \ln (3)+4^x\cdot \ln (4) -2x##

Here solution must be exists for ##x>0##, because for ##x\leq 0##, L.H.S>0 while R.H.S <0

##f^{'}(x) = 2^x\cdot \left(\ln 2\right)^2+3^x\cdot \left(\ln 3\right)^2+4^x\cdot \left(\ln 4\right)^2 - 2##

and ##f^{''}(x) = 2^x\cdot \left(\ln 2\right)^3+3^x\cdot \left(\ln 3\right)^3+4^x\cdot \left(\ln 4\right)^3 >0\forall x\in \mathbb{R}##

Means function ##f(x)## is Concave - Upward and ##f^{'}(x)## is Strictly Increasing function

and when ##x\rightarrow +\infty, f^{'}(x)\rightarrow \infty ## and when ##x\rightarrow -\infty, f^{'}(x)\rightarrow -\infty ##

So using LMVT, function ##f^{'}(x) = 0## has exactly one real root.

But I did not understand How can i calculate root of ##f(x) = 0##

Help please

Thanks in Advance.


The function g(x) = ln(2)*2^x + ln(3)*3^x + ln(4)*4^x - 2*x is strictly convex on the real line (what you call concave up --- an archaic terminology no longer used by optimization people), so there are either 0, 1 or 2 real solutions of g(x) = 0. What you checked is not sufficient to establish the existence of a real root; can you really say for sure that there must be a root?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K