MHB Solve for x: e^-0.38x=.3 - I Got .4387 - Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter goosey00
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To solve the equation e^(-0.38x) = 0.3, the initial answer of 0.4387 is incorrect. The correct approach involves taking the natural logarithm of both sides, leading to the equation -0.38x = ln(0.3). By rearranging, x can be calculated as ln(0.3) / -0.38, resulting in approximately 3.168. It's recommended to use a scientific calculator or online tools to verify calculations. Understanding how to properly use logarithms is essential for solving exponential equations.
goosey00
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Solve for x:e^-0.38x=.3
I got .4387 Is that correct
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
goosey00 said:
Solve for x:e^-0.38x=.3
I got .4387 Is that correct

You can check by evaluating $e^{-0.38*0.4387}$
If we use google calculator we end up with 0.8467 (4sf) so 0.4387 is not correct.

What do you know about solving exponential equations and/or the natural logarithm?
 
I just can't remember how to put it in my calculator again. How did you get the .4387 to times by it-[FONT=MathJax_Math-italic-Web]e [FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]−[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]0.38[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]∗[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]0.4387
 
goosey00 said:
I just can't remember how to put it in my calculator again. How did you get the .4387 to times by it-[FONT=MathJax_Math-italic-Web]e [FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]−[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]0.38[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]∗[FONT=MathJax_Main-Web]0.4387

Either
Code:
 [2nd] [ln] [(] [-][0.38] [x] [0.4387][)][=]

or
Code:
 [(] [-][0.38] [x] [0.4387][)][2nd] [ln][=]

You can also use an online calculator to check answers - I used google which you can see in the link above and there is also a MHB calculator which works. For your own calculator it may be prudent to find the manual online (search for "Ti30x user manual") so you're not stuck in an exam.

Bear in mind that was just a test to see if your answer was right (it isn't). You need to use the natural logarithm (ln) to find x.

$-0.38\ln(x) = ln(0.3)$
 
Hello, goosey00!

Solve for x:\;e^{-0.38x}\:=\:0.3

I got 0.4387 . Is that correct?
Can't you check your answer?
\text{We have: }\:e^{-0.38x} \;=\;0.3

\text{Take logs: }\:\ln(e^{-0.38x}) \;=\;\ln(0.3) \quad\Rightarrow\quad \text{-}0.38x\underbrace{\ln e}_{\text{This is 1}} \;=\;\ln(0.3)
. . . \text{-}0.38x \;=\;\ln(0.3) \quad\Rightarrow\quad x \;=\;\frac{\ln(0.3)}{\text{-}0.38}

. . . . . x \;=\;3.168\,349\,485
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Back
Top