Solving Logarithms: Finding the Inverse of g(x)=3+x+e^x

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kdinser
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logarithms
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the inverse of the function g(x) = 3 + x + e^x, specifically focusing on the evaluation of g^-1(4). Participants explore the challenges of solving for x in the context of logarithmic and exponential functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in finding the inverse of g(x) and is unsure how to proceed after applying logarithmic functions.
  • Another participant notes that the inverse of g is not an elementary function due to the structure of g(x).
  • A different participant suggests that finding the root of the equation 3 + x + e^x = 0 is necessary, but admits to being stumped on how to derive an exact answer.
  • One participant interprets the task as finding g^-1(4) and states that the answer should be 0, based on their calculations.
  • Another participant corrects a misunderstanding regarding the inverse and clarifies that g(0) = 4, thus g^-1(4) = 0.
  • Some participants discuss the relationship between function values and their inverses, emphasizing that the problem only requires finding g^-1(4) rather than the general form of g^-1(x).
  • One participant acknowledges the clarification and expresses gratitude for the insights shared by others.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

While there is some agreement on the value of g^-1(4) being 0, the discussion contains varying interpretations of the problem and the methods for finding the inverse, indicating that multiple views remain on the approach to solving the equation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that there is no general method for solving the equation x + e^x = 1, which adds complexity to the discussion. Additionally, the nature of g being monotone increasing is mentioned, which implies that the inverse is well-defined.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students revisiting calculus concepts, particularly those dealing with inverse functions and exponential equations.

kdinser
Messages
335
Reaction score
2
Greetings all, I'm doing a refresh of calculus and physics in preparation for getting back to school this fall after a 5 year layoff. Most stuff is coming back pretty quickly, but I'm stuck on this one problem. I'm sure I'm missing something small, but I just haven't been able to find any example problems that match this one.

g(x)=3+x+e^x
g(x)=y

I need to find the inverse of this function, which means solving for x. If I take the ln e^x to get x, I'm stuck on the other side with ln (y-3-x)=x I'm not sure where to go from here, any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since g has x both "inside" and "outside" the exponential, its inverse is not any "elementary" function. Exactly what does the problem ask you to do?
 
If your finding the root of the equation then you want to find x for:

3 + x + e^x = 0

And I must say I'm a little stumped on how you would work out an exact answer.
 
if g(x)=3+x+e^x Find g^-1(4)

I'm reading this as "find the inverse g(x) function and then solve it when x=4" The answer in the back of the book shows that it should be 0.
 
Last edited:
The inverse of g(x = 4) is 1/(7 + e4) though.
 
that isn't the inverse, that's the reciprocal.

by inspection g(0) = 3+0+e^0 = 4,

(technical note, g is monotone increasing so inverse is well defined)

hence g^{-1}(4) = 0

and similiarly g^{-1}(4+e) = 1
 
Last edited:
Since it wasn't immediately apparent to me what matt was doing, here's a general point:

For some function f(x),

If:
f(b)=a

Then:
f^{-1} (a) = b
 
Yep. The problem did NOT ask that you actually find g-1(x),
only that you find g-1(4).

That is exactly the same as solving the equation 3+ x+ ex= 4 or
x+ ex= 1. There is still no general way of solving an equation like that, but you might be as smart as Matt Grime and recognize that if x= 0, e0= 1 so
0+ e0= 1. g-1(4)= 0.
 
Thanks guys, after thinking about Matt's answer, I'm pretty sure that's what the problem was getting at.
 
  • #10
HallsofIvy said:
Yep. The problem did NOT ask that you actually find g-1(x),
only that you find g-1(4).

That is exactly the same as solving the equation 3+ x+ ex= 4 or
x+ ex= 1. There is still no general way of solving an equation like that, but you might be as smart as Matt Grime and recognize that if x= 0, e0= 1 so
0+ e0= 1. g-1(4)= 0.

need help solving a problem can u help
 
  • #11
If you will post your problem in a new thread I am sure a lot of people can help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K