MHB Solve R Root with Newton's Method: n ≥2, R>0

  • Thread starter Thread starter house2012
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method Newtons
AI Thread Summary
Using Newton's method for the functions \(f(x) = 1 - \frac{R}{x^n}\) and \(g(x) = x^n - R\) yields two distinct iterative formulas for calculating \(R^{1/n}\). The first iteration formula simplifies to \(x_{k+1} = x_k - \frac{(x_k^n - R)x_k}{Rn}\). The second iteration results in \(x_{k+1} = x_k - \frac{x_k(x_k^n - R)}{-nR}\). Both methods converge to the same root, but they differ in their formulations and convergence behavior. Understanding these differences is crucial for effectively applying Newton's method in this context.
house2012
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, need some help with this question. I am stuck and don't know what to do.

Q: Show that using Newton's method to $$1-\frac{R}{x^n}$$ and to $$x^n-R$$ for determining $$(R)^{\frac{1}{n}}$$ results in 2 similar, but different iterative formulas, with $$n \ge 2$$ and $$R >0$$

Thanks for your help guys!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
First the wording of this question makes it very difficult to understand what is required. I will assume that you are asked to use Newton's method with:

\[f(x)=1-\frac{R}{x^n}\]

to find \(R^{1/n}\).

First applying Newton's method to \(f(x)\) if it works finds a solution to \(f(x)=0\).

Putting \(f(x)=1-\frac{R}{x^n}=0\) rearranges to \(\frac{R}{x^n}=1\) or \(x^n=R\) so \(f(x)\) is of the correct form for finding \(R^{1/n}\).

Now Newton's iteration to find a root of \(f(x)=0\) is:

\[x_{k+1}=x_k-\frac{f(x_k)}{f'(x_k)}\]
which in this case reduces to:

\[x_{k+1}=x_k-\frac{(x_k^n-R)x_k}{Rn}\]

Now the question as asked does not indicate where to go from here.

CB
 
Last edited:
the itirating
\[ x_{i+1} = x_i - \frac{f(x_i)}{f'(x_i)} \]

for first one

\[ x_1 = x_0 - \frac{((x_0)^n - R)}{n(x_0 ^{n-1})} \]

second one

\[ x_1 = x_0 - \frac{1 - \frac{R}{x_0 ^{n}} }{ \frac{-nR}{x_0 ^{n+1}}}= x_0 - \frac{x_0(x_0 ^n-R)}{-nR} \]

these are different
 
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...
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top