Solving Equations Involving Exponentials and Logarithms

  • Thread starter Thread starter ProPM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Graphs
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving equations involving exponentials and logarithms, specifically focusing on the functions f(x) = ae-kx and f(x) = ex+1 - 3. Participants are exploring how to derive values for parameters and find inverse functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive equations from given points and expresses uncertainty in solving them. Some participants suggest using logarithmic properties to simplify expressions. Another participant raises questions about the domain and range of functions and the precision of terminology used in describing them.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing feedback and suggestions for alternative approaches. There is a mix of attempts to clarify concepts and refine mathematical expressions, with some participants expressing confidence in their understanding while others seek reassurance.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention feeling intimidated by logarithmic functions and express concerns about their understanding of the material. There are also discussions about the precision of mathematical language and the implications of different interpretations of the functions involved.

ProPM
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Find the values of a and k if the graph with equation f(x) = ae-kx passes through the points (1, e) and (-1,2e)

So, from the information above I managed to derive two equations to solve simultaneously:

ae-k = e
aek = 2e

I am pretty sure those are correct, but I am not 100%. I just think I am having more of a problem solving them!

Here is what I tried:

I tried dividing the second equation by the first:

therefore: ek / e-k = e2k
2e / e = 2, hence:

e2k = 2

To solve for k I did:

(ek)2 = 2 and I let ek = y, hence
y = √2

ek = √2
k log e = 1/2 log 2
k = 1/2 log 2 / log e

I hope my maths is not very confusing, although I do recognized there must be other shorter paths...

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
that is correct but from here

e2k = 2

you could have taken advantage of the 'ln' function to get a simpler looking answer of

2k =ln2 such that k = ½ ln2.
 
Cool, thanks rock freak :smile:
 
Oh, if you wouldn't mind, I have a series of question in the following format and I wanted to make sure I am heading down the right path: Consider f: x: ex+1 - 3

a) Find the inverse function
b) State the range and domain

a) I did: ex+1 = y + 3

loge y + 3 = x + 1
loge (x+3) - 1 = y

For the range, plotting the graphs in my calculator I figured:
For f: Domain: x goes all the way to infinity
Range: y is always bigger than - 3

For f-1: Domain x bigger than -3 and range would be all the way to infinity.

I think I am good with that but I am a bit intimidated when ln is involved, since I am not used working with it, for example: ln (x-1) + 2

Thanks once again.
 
ProPM said:
Oh, if you wouldn't mind, I have a series of question in the following format and I wanted to make sure I am heading down the right path: Consider f: x: ex+1 - 3

a) Find the inverse function
b) State the range and domain

a) I did: ex+1 = y + 3

loge y + 3 = x + 1
loge (x+3) - 1 = y
Looks fine, but you can write ln instead of loge.
ProPM said:
For the range, plotting the graphs in my calculator I figured:
For f: Domain: x goes all the way to infinity
From where? The domain of f is all real numbers, or (-inf, +inf).
ProPM said:
Range: y is always bigger than - 3

For f-1: Domain x bigger than -3 and range would be all the way to infinity.
See above. "All the way to infinity" is not precise. Just say all real numbers.
ProPM said:
I think I am good with that but I am a bit intimidated when ln is involved, since I am not used working with it, for example: ln (x-1) + 2

Thanks once again.
 
Ok, thanks!

As for my ln dilema, I will be more precise: ln x - 4 where x is bigger than 0.

so: ln x = y + 4

hence, ey+4 = x

Is that ok for the inverse?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
ProPM said:
Ok, thanks!

As for my ln dilema, I will be more precise: ln x - 4 where x is bigger than 0.

so: ln x = y + 4

hence, ey+4 = x

Is that ok for the inverse?

Thanks

No.
I'm assuming that you're still working with y = ex+1 - 3, and solving the equation for x.

y = ex+1 - 3
<==> y + 3 = ex+1
<==> ln(y + 3) = x + 1
<==> ln(y + 3) - 1 = x

The two equations y = ex+1 - 3 and x = ln(y + 3) - 1 are equivalent, which means that any pair of numbers (x, y) that is a solution to one equation is also a solution to the other equation. This also means that the graphs of the two equations are exactly the same. The only difference is that one equation gives y as a function of x, and the other equation gives x as a (different) function of y.

If y = f(x) = ex+1 - 3, then
x = f-1(y) = ln(y + 3) - 1

To write f-1 as a function of x, replace x for y and y for x in the 2nd equation above.

IOW, y = f-1(x) = ln(x + 3) - 1
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
5K