Solving Lagrange Multipliers: Find Extrema of Distance from (1,2,3) to Sphere

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around using the Lagrange multiplier method to find the extrema of the distance from the point (1,2,3) to the surface of the sphere defined by the equation {x}^{2}+{y}^{2}+{z}^{2}=4. Participants explore the mathematical formulation, substitution into constraints, and the implications for critical points.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Mathematical reasoning, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the objective function as the square of the distance and sets up the Lagrange multiplier equations.
  • Another participant suggests that the extrema will have values of $\sqrt{14}\pm2$, based on the distance from the origin.
  • There is a discussion about substituting values back into the constraint and deriving expressions for y and z in terms of x.
  • Multiple participants express uncertainty about the correctness of their derived values for x, leading to further verification of critical points.
  • One participant calculates that there should be six critical points based on the permutations of possible values for x, y, and z.
  • Another participant suggests testing all critical points in the objective function to identify extrema.
  • There is a calculation presented for the minimum and maximum values of the objective function, which aligns with earlier predictions regarding the extrema.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach to finding critical points and the use of the Lagrange multiplier method, but there are differing views on the number of critical points and the implications of their calculations. The discussion remains somewhat unresolved regarding the verification of specific values and the interpretation of results.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the nature of the critical points and the behavior of the objective function are not fully explored, and there are unresolved mathematical steps in the verification process.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and practitioners interested in optimization techniques, particularly in the context of multivariable calculus and constrained optimization problems.

ctb94
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I am having a bit of trouble with the Lagrange multiplier method. My question is:

Use the Lagrange multiplier method to find the extrema points of the distance from the point (1,2,3) to the surface of the sphere {x}^{2}+{y}^{2}+{z}^{2}=4. Find the possible values for of \lambda.

This is what I have so far:

\nablad=\lambdaq

d(x,y,z)={(x-1)}^{2}+{(y-2)}^{2}+{(z-3)}^{2}

2(x-1)=\lambda2x
2(y-2)=\lambda2y
2(z-3)=\lambda2z

This is where I become stuck on the problem. Thank you in advance for any help with this problem!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would begin by observing that the given sphere of radius 2 is centered at the origin, and the point $(1,2,3)$ is $\sqrt{14}$ units from the origin, so our extrema will have values of $\sqrt{14}\pm2$.

Now, we are given the objective function (let's use the square of the distance for simplcity):

$$f(x,y,z)=(x-1)^2+(y-2)^2+(z-3)^2$$

subject to the constraint:

$$g(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^2-4=0$$

So, Lagrange gives us the system (after dividing through by 2 in each case):

$$x-1=\lambda x$$

$$y-2=\lambda y$$

$$z-3=\lambda z$$

Now, the first two equations imply:

$$\frac{x-1}{x}=\frac{y-2}{y}\implies y=2x$$

And the first and third equations imply:

$$\frac{x-1}{x}=\frac{z-3}{z}\implies z=3x$$

Substituting these values into the constraint, what do you find?
 
When substituting these values back into the constraint, I got x=+/-sqrt(2/7). Is this correct? If so, do I then substitute this back into y=2x and z=3x?
 
ctb94 said:
When substituting these values back into the constraint, I got x=+/-sqrt(2/7). Is this correct? If so, do I then substitute this back into y=2x and z=3x?

Yes, you are correct on both counts...how many critical points will this generate?
 
I believe it should be six critical points then, correct?
 
ctb94 said:
I believe it should be six critical points then, correct?

There are 2 possible values for each of $x$, $y$ and $z$, so the fundamental counting principle says there will be 8 permutations, in much the same way that a 3 digit binary number can have one of 8 possible values.

So, what you want to do is test all of these 8 critical points in your objective function, and then choose only the 2 points that result in your extrema, that is, the point that results in the smallest value and the point that results in the largest value.
 
That makes complete sense! Thank you so much for making this concept so much easier to understand!
 
Looking at the form of the objective function, we should easily be able to see that the maximum occurs when all the variables are negative, and the minimum occurs when they are all positive...let's see:

$$f_{\min}\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}},2\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}},3\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}\right)=14\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}-1\right)^2=14\left(\frac{2}{7}-2\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}+1\right)=18-4\sqrt{14}=\left(\sqrt{14}-2\right)^2$$

$$f_{\max}\left(-\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}},-2\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}},-3\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}\right)=14\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}+1\right)^2=14\left(\frac{2}{7}+2\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}+1\right)=18+4\sqrt{14}=\left(\sqrt{14}+2\right)^2$$

These values do in fact agree with the values we predicted at the beginning (noting that our objective function is the square of the distance).
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K