MHB Sydney's question at Yahoo Answers regarding root approximation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on approximating the root of the equation x^4 + x - 3 = 0 for x ≥ 0. An initial guess of x = 1 is suggested based on a function plot. Newton's method is applied, leading to a recursive formula for refining the approximation. Using a TI-89 Titanium graphing calculator, the iterative process yields a final approximation of the root as x ≈ 1.16403514029, indicating high precision. The response effectively guides the original poster in solving their calculus problem.
MarkFL
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
13,284
Reaction score
12
Here is the question:

CALCULUS HELP PLEASE!?

Approximate the solution to the following equation that satisfies the given condition: x^(4) + x - 3 = 0 ; x is greater than or equal to 0Please help I'm having so much trouble!

Here is a link to the question:

CALCULUS HELP PLEASE!? - Yahoo! Answers

I have posted a link there to this topic so the OP can find my response.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello Sydney,

First, let's take a look at a plot of the function:

View attachment 582

We see the positive root is near $x=1$, so that will be a good initial guess.

Newton's method gives us the recursion:

$\displaystyle x_{n+1}=x_n-\frac{f(x_n)}{f'(x_n)}$

In our case, this is:

$\displaystyle x_{n+1}=x_n-\frac{x_n^4+x_n-3}{4x_n^3+1}=\frac{3(x_n^4+1)}{4x_n^3+1}$

where $x_0=1$.

Now, I have a TI-89 Titanium graphing calculator, so what I do is enter the following:

1 [ENTER] Result: 1
(3(ans(1)^4+1))/(4ans(1)^3+1) ♦[ENTER] Result: 1.2
♦[ENTER] Result: 1.16541961577
♦[ENTER] Result: 1.16403726916
♦[ENTER] Result: 1.16403514029
♦[ENTER] Result: 1.16403514029

Since the last two approximations are the same, we have exceeded the limit of accuracy of the calculator, and we know the required root, to 12 digits, is:

$x\approx1.16403514029$
 

Attachments

  • rootplot.jpg
    rootplot.jpg
    5.2 KB · Views: 88
Last edited:
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top