Solving an exponential function

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on solving the equation e^(2x) + 2 = e^(3x - 4) using various methods, including the Newton-Raphson method. An initial attempt to transform the equation into a cubic polynomial form p^3 - 54.6p^2 - 109.2 = 0, where p = e^x, is presented. The approximate solution found is x ≈ 4.00, which is confirmed to be close but not exact, as further analysis shows it differs by 2 in absolute terms. The conversation also touches on the existence of complex roots, clarifying that the cubic polynomial has only one real root and two complex roots, thus no additional real solutions exist. The discussion emphasizes the importance of numerical methods for approximating solutions in exponential equations.
chwala
Gold Member
Messages
2,827
Reaction score
415

Homework Statement


[/B]
Solve the equation
## e^{2x}+2=e^{3x-4}##

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know by using Newton-Raphson method the problem can be solved, i however tried solving it as follows
##e^{3x-4}-e^{2x}-2=0, e^{3x}-e^{2x}.e^{4}-2e^{4}=0, p^3-p^2.e^4-2e^4=0, →p^3-54.6p^2-109.2=0##
where
##p=e^x##,
am i correct, will i get solution this way
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
chwala said:

Homework Statement


[/B]
Solve the equation
## e^{2x}+2=e^{3x-4}##

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know by using Newton-Raphson method the problem can be solved, i however tried solving it as follows
##e^{3x-4}-e^{2x}-2=0, e^{3x}-e^{2x}.e^{4}-2e^{4}=0, p^3-p^2.e^4-2e^4=0##
where
##p=e^x##,
am i correct, will i get solution this way
Yes, you can do it.
 
  • Like
Likes chwala

ehild said:
Yes, you can do it.
i will post solution soon, i don't have calculator now but i know solution will be of the form ## x=ln p##
 
the solution is thus ##p=54.64→x=ln 54.64, ⇒x=4.00##
 
chwala said:
the solution is thus ##p=54.64→x=ln 54.64, ⇒x=4.00##
Yes, very close to it.
 
ehild said:
Yes, very close to it.
yes, ##x=4.00 ## is an approximate solution to the problem.
 
chwala said:
yes, ##x=4.00 ## is an approximate solution to the problem.
Might there be other approximate solutions to the problem, i ignored the negative values of ##p=-0.0183+1.41i, -0.0183-1.41i##
 
chwala said:

Homework Statement


[/B]
Solve the equation
## e^{2x}+2=e^{3x-4}##

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know by using Newton-Raphson method the problem can be solved, i however tried solving it as follows
##e^{3x-4}-e^{2x}-2=0, e^{3x}-e^{2x}.e^{4}-2e^{4}=0, p^3-p^2.e^4-2e^4=0, →p^3-54.6p^2-109.2=0##
where
##p=e^x##,
am i correct, will i get solution this way

You will get an approximation. To get better accuracy, you need a more accurate value for ##e^4##. In principle you can write down an exact solution, using exact formulas for solutions of a cubic equation and retaining ##e^4## in symbolic form.
 
  • Like
Likes chwala
chwala said:
the solution is thus ##p=54.64→x=ln 54.64, ⇒x=4.00##

You can see that ##x=4## cannot be the solution, but is very close to a solution. For ##x = 4## the left-hand-side is ##2+e^{8\times 4} = 2 + e^8## while the right-hand-side is ##e^{3 \times 4 - 4} = e^8##. Since ##e^8 \doteq 2980.958## the two sides of the equation are close in terms of relative magnitude (that is, % difference), although they still differ by 2 in absolute terms.

You can also see how to get a good approximation quickly: set ##x = 4 + y## with ##y## small. The equation becomes ##2 + e^8 e^{2y} = e^8 e^{3y}##, or ##e^{3y} - e^{2y} = 2 e^{-8} \doteq##0.6709252558e-3. Using the series expansions ##e^{3y} = 1 + 3y + \cdots## and ##e^{2y} = 1 + 2y + \cdots##, we have ##3y - 2y + \cdots =##0.6709252558e-3, so ##y \doteq##0.6709252558e-3 and ##x \doteq 4.000670925.## This is still an approximation, but it is a pretty good one: with this new ##x## the left-hand side is 2986.960670, while the right-hand-side is 2986.964042.
 
  • Like
Likes chwala
  • #10
Ray Vickson said:
You can see that ##x=4## cannot be the solution, but is very close to a solution. For ##x = 4## the left-hand-side is ##2+e^{8\times 4} = 2 + e^8## while the right-hand-side is ##e^{3 \times 4 - 4} = e^8##. Since ##e^8 \doteq 2980.958## the two sides of the equation are close in terms of relative magnitude (that is, % difference), although they still differ by 2 in absolute terms.

You can also see how to get a good approximation quickly: set ##x = 4 + y## with ##y## small. The equation becomes ##2 + e^8 e^{2y} = e^8 e^{3y}##, or ##e^{3y} - e^{2y} = 2 e^{-8} \doteq##0.6709252558e-3. Using the series expansions ##e^{3y} = 1 + 3y + \cdots## and ##e^{2y} = 1 + 2y + \cdots##, we have ##3y - 2y + \cdots =##0.6709252558e-3, so ##y \doteq##0.6709252558e-3 and ##x \doteq 4.000670925.## This is still an approximation, but it is a pretty good one: with this new ##x## the left-hand side is 2986.960670, while the right-hand-side is 2986.964042.
Thanks Ray, yeah right I know the solution may be approximated by various numerical methods techniques, I appreciate bro
 
  • #11
chwala said:
Might there be other approximate solutions to the problem? I ignored the negative values of ##p=-0.0183+1.41i, -0.0183-1.41i##.
Those aren't negative roots; they're complex roots.

You had a cubic polynomial, so it has only three roots. The one real root gave you the solution you wanted. The two complex roots won't yield real solutions, so there are no more solutions in the (assumed) domain of the problem.
 
  • #12
Agreed
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K