Solving Inverse Function f(x) = (3 - e^(2x))^(1/2)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the inverse of the function f(x) = (3 - e^(2x))^(1/2). Participants are exploring the correct approach to manipulate the function and its notation in the context of inverse functions.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss switching the variables x and y to find the inverse, with some questioning the notation used in the original problem. Others express confusion about the relationship between logarithmic and exponential functions in this context.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with various interpretations of the problem being explored. Some participants have offered insights into the notation and the properties of inverse functions, but no consensus has been reached regarding the correct method to find the inverse.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the definitions and roles of the variables in the context of inverse functions, as well as references to a back-of-the-book solution that may not align with the participants' approaches.

Miike012
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
0
f(x) = (3 - e^(2x))^(1/2)

y^2 = 3 - e^(2x)

-(y^2 - 3) = e^(2x)

ln(-(y^2 - 3) ) / 2 = x

What am i doing wrong?
In the back of the book it says...
ln(-(x^2 - 3) ) / 2 = y
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Miike012 said:
f(x) = (3 - e^(2x))^(1/2)
[or y= (3 - e^(2x))^(1/2)]
Here you should switch the x and y, and then solve for y. The result will give you the inverse. So instead of
y^2 = 3 - e^(2x)
you should have
x^2 = 3 - e^(2y)
... and so on.
 
As eumyang said, it is just a matter of notation. We typically write a function as "y= f(x)", not "x= f(y)". But, of course, as long as f is the same function "y= f(x)", "x= f(y)", or "b= f(a)" all refer to the same function.
 
Knowing that log functions are the inverse of exponential functions, I thought all I had to do was find the log of the expo? This is obviously incorrect for me to do?
 
if:
[tex]x\rightarrow f \rightarrow y[/tex]
then:
[tex]y\rightarrow f^{-1} \rightarrow x[/tex]

which is why your notation is the opposite, in the answer of your book they redefined the inverse function to be a function of x
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K