Solve f'(x) = 0: Why is There No Solution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nesan
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the equation f'(x) = 0 for the function f(x) = (ln x + 2x)^(1/3). Participants are exploring why the textbook states there is "no solution" despite an attempt to find a value for x.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the logarithm function's domain, specifically that x must be positive for ln(x) to be defined. There is also a mention of the potential for complex solutions when using computational tools like Wolfram Alpha.

Discussion Status

The discussion highlights a realization regarding the domain of the logarithm function. Some participants are questioning the validity of the solution x = -1/2 in the context of the problem, while others note the differences in definitions used by computational software.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the requirement for x to be positive due to the definition of the natural logarithm, which is a key constraint in this problem. The discussion also touches on the differences between real and complex solutions as presented by computational tools.

nesan
Messages
74
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=((1+/+x)+++2)+/+(3(2x+++lnx))^(2/3)+=+0



Solve the equation f'(x) = 0

f(x) = (ln x + 2x)^(1/3)


The Attempt at a Solution



As you can see, for the function

((1 / x) + 2) / (3(2x + lnx))^(2/3) = 0

I can get a value for x which is - 1 / 2

But my textbook says "no solution"

Why is that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mark44 said:
x must be positive in order for ln(x) to be defined.

Oh wow, I totally missed that. Thank you very much. :)
 
That does not mean that wolfram alpha is wrong however. Wolfram alpha uses a definition of the logarithm which is also defined for negative numbers. This definition uses complex numbers.

However, you likely did not encounter complex numbers and complex logarithms yet, so in your problem x=-1/2 is not a valid solution as the logarithm is not well-defined.

This is a bit the danger of using computer software. Their solutions are not wrong, but they can be different solutions from what you want.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K