Solving an equation with variable as denominator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CptDarling
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Variable
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to Lagrange multipliers, specifically focusing on solving an equation for the variable λ, which appears in the denominator. The original poster expresses difficulty in solving the equation independently, despite having a solution provided by an external tool.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the interpretation of the equation involving λ and suggest steps for simplification. There is also questioning of the necessity of finding λ in the context of Lagrange multipliers, with some participants noting that it may not be essential for solving the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and alternative perspectives on the role of λ in the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the simplification of the equation, but there is no consensus on the necessity of finding λ.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the setup of the equation and the relevance of λ in the context of Lagrange multipliers, which may affect the direction of the discussion.

CptDarling
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The problem initially was a Lagrange multipliers question, and I'm trying to solve for λ. I have an equation in terms of λ alone, but I just can't solve it. I plugged it into Wolfram Alpha and it gave me the λ value in the back of the textbook, but I still don't know how to solve the equation myself.


Homework Equations


4(1/2λ)^2-λ=0


The Attempt at a Solution



4(1^2/2λ^2)-λ=0
4/2λ^2=λ
2/λ^2=λ

And I don't know where to go from here
 
Physics news on Phys.org
By 4(1/2\lambda)^2= \lambda, I presume you mean 4(1/(2\lambda)^2= \lambda rather than 4(1/2)^2\lambda)^2= \lambda

If that is correct, an obvious first step would be to cancel the "4"s to get
\frac{1}{\lambda^2}= \lambda
and the multiply on both sides by \lambda.

But I am puzzled as to why you would want to find \lambda. It is not part of the solution to a Lagrange multipliers problem and it is never necessary to find it to solve a Lagrange multipliers problem.

Using Lagrange multipliers always gives a series of equation like:
f_1(x,y,z)= \lambda g_1(x,y,z)
f_2(x,y,z)= \lambda g_2(x,y,z)
f_3(x,y,z)= \lambda g_3(x,y,z)

and a good first step is to eliminate \lambda by dividing on equation by another.
 
HallsofIvy said:
By 4(1/2\lambda)^2= \lambda, I presume you mean 4(1/(2\lambda)^2= \lambda rather than 4(1/2)^2\lambda)^2= \lambda

If that is correct, an obvious first step would be to cancel the "4"s to get
\frac{1}{\lambda^2}= \lambda
and the multiply on both sides by \lambda.

But I am puzzled as to why you would want to find \lambda. It is not part of the solution to a Lagrange multipliers problem and it is never necessary to find it to solve a Lagrange multipliers problem.

Using Lagrange multipliers always gives a series of equation like:
f_1(x,y,z)= \lambda g_1(x,y,z)
f_2(x,y,z)= \lambda g_2(x,y,z)
f_3(x,y,z)= \lambda g_3(x,y,z)

and a good first step is to eliminate \lambda by dividing on equation by another.

Actually, finding λ is often very important in solving a constrained optimization problem. Often, for example, we find x(λ), y(λ) and z(λ) from the optimality conditions, then find itself (and thus the values of x, y and z) by solving an equation in λ obtained from the constraint. Many optimization codes and methods for numerical solution depend crucially on estimating Lagrange multipliers along with the variables, and many of the very best methods would not work at all without doing this.

RGV
 
HallsofIvy said:
By 4(1/2\lambda)^2= \lambda, I presume you mean 4(1/(2\lambda)^2= \lambda rather than 4(1/2)^2\lambda)^2= \lambda
I doubt it. You really are very sloppy, Ivy! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K