 mersenneforum.org Exponential/Polynomial Hybrid Expression??
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  2009-04-27, 01:51 #1 Unregistered   32·307 Posts Exponential/Polynomial Hybrid Expression?? Hello, I am taking a differential equations class and I am a little stuck on a particular step. I am trying to solve for t. I have the following expressions: -6e^(t(c-d)) + ((c-d)^3)t^3 + 3((c-d)^2)t^2 + 6(c-d)t + 6 = 0 and similarly, -6e^(t(c-d)) + ((c-d)^3)t^3 + 3((c-d)^2)t^2 + 6(c-d)t + 6 = 6b(14 + b) Note that b, c and d are constants, and their average values are known (they are probabilities). This problem seems extremely difficult because it has both an exponential and polynomial that include the independent variable. I have tried a couple methods but I seem unable to figure out how to solve for t. In fact, I do not believe there is an elementary method of solving for t unless I am missing something obvious. It should also be noted that my professor has a habit of assigning problems that are beyond this class. Can anyone provide some hints that would prove beneficial? Any help would be greatly appreciated. I assume that both expressions have very similar methods of solving. Thanks, a puzzled math student  2009-04-27, 09:13 #2 davieddy   "Lucan" Dec 2006 England 2×3×13×83 Posts It cries out for a successive approximation method. Do you know any? You could start by sketching the exponential and cubic expressions graphically.   2009-04-27, 10:25 #3 J.F.   Jun 2008 23×32 Posts removed nonsense, have to look better... [edit2] I agree with davieddy's hint. Last fiddled with by J.F. on 2009-04-27 at 10:27   2009-04-27, 10:44 #4 davieddy   "Lucan" Dec 2006 England 647410 Posts It seems that letting (c-d)t = x might help the presentation of the problem, if not its solution.   2009-04-27, 11:00   #5
davieddy

"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England

2·3·13·83 Posts Quote:
 Originally Posted by J.F. removed nonsense, have to look better... [edit2] I agree with davieddy's hint.
Curious to know what "nonsense" you edited    2009-04-27, 13:06   #6
J.F.

Jun 2008

23·32 Posts Quote:
 Originally Posted by davieddy Curious to know what "nonsense" you edited Well, I saw 2 expressions with the same exp term, so I said something like "try computing the difference" :).   2009-04-27, 15:27   #7
davieddy

"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England

2×3×13×83 Posts Quote:
 Originally Posted by J.F. Well, I saw 2 expressions with the same exp term, so I said something like "try computing the difference" :).
Yes. If the equations were true simultaneously, one might conclude
that 6b(14-b) = 0. The same thought crossed my mind.   2009-04-29, 10:43 #8 Kevin   Aug 2002 Ann Arbor, MI 43310 Posts Well, the polynomial part corresponds to the first 4 terms in the Taylor expansion of 6e^(t(c-d)). You might be able to get some information by looking at the Taylor expansion of the function involved and get some information out of that. For example, if you set f(t)=-6e^(t(c-d)) + ((c-d)^3)t^3 + 3((c-d)^2)t^2 + 6(c-d)t + 6, then f(0)=0 and looking at the Taylor expansion makes it obvious that f'(t)>0 for t>0, so you don't have any positive solutions.   2009-04-29, 13:29   #9
R.D. Silverman

"Bob Silverman"
Nov 2003
North of Boston

23×3×311 Posts Quote:
 Originally Posted by Unregistered Hello, I am taking a differential equations class and I am a little stuck on a particular step. I am trying to solve for t. I have the following expressions: -6e^(t(c-d)) + ((c-d)^3)t^3 + 3((c-d)^2)t^2 + 6(c-d)t + 6 = 0 and similarly, -6e^(t(c-d)) + ((c-d)^3)t^3 + 3((c-d)^2)t^2 + 6(c-d)t + 6 = 6b(14 + b) Note that b, c and d are constants, and their average values are known (they are probabilities). This problem seems extremely difficult because it has both an exponential and polynomial that include the independent variable. I have tried a couple methods but I seem unable to figure out how to solve for t. In fact, I do not believe there is an elementary method of solving for t unless I am missing something obvious. It should also be noted that my professor has a habit of assigning problems that are beyond this class. Can anyone provide some hints that would prove beneficial? Any help would be greatly appreciated. I assume that both expressions have very similar methods of solving. Thanks, a puzzled math student
There is certainly no closed form solution, even in terms of the
Lambert W function.   2009-04-29, 21:47 #10 ewmayer ∂2ω=0   Sep 2002 República de California 3×7×13×43 Posts Substituting x := (c-d)t as suggested by davieddy, you have: f(x) := -6*exp(x) + x^3 + 3*x^2 + 6*x + 6 = 0 and g(x) := -6*exp(x) + x^3 + 3*x^2 + 6*x + 6 - 6*b*(14 + b) = 0. The first one is easy: Rewriting as 6*exp(x) = x^3 + 3*x^2 + 6*x + 6, we see by inspection (a.k.a. "lucky guess") that x = 0 is a solution. (In fact the unique solution). More generally, we could use a standard Newton iteration scheme, i.e. pick a starting guess for a solution of the first equation, x0, then iterate as xk+1 = xk - f(xk)/f'(xk) . In your case f' = -6*exp(x) + 3*x^2 + 6*x + 6; Starting with (say) x = 1 (x = 0 won't work because f'(0) = 0), here is the sequence of iterates: x0 = 1 x1 = 0.7635388975951208073691778049 x2 = 0.5804051861431977391558499448 x3 = 0.4397186311643678335652810243 x4 = 0.3322945610689959985673151052 x5 = 0.2506394392087383621381660155 x6 = 0.1887812521961736894907693542 x7 = 0.1420384340213115156125680594 x8 = 0.1067839994724474469983559004 x9 = 0.08023180409699953043063747583 x10= 0.06025485561260824648628371975, etc. To anyone familiar with Newton`s method this seems odd, because the method is supposed to converge quickly (specifically, quadratically fast) once we are close to a root of the equation in question, but since we already found x = 0, we see that the problem is that f' = 0 at the true root, which is what causes the convergence to become subquadratic. The same zero-derivative issue should not be a problem for your 2nd equation as long as the right-hand side is nonzero, i.e. b is not equal to 0 or -14, but only certain ranges of b admit of a solution. For instance, letting B := -6*b*(14 + b), for B = 1 we get a solution x = 1.315946600918394508719581079... You can usually get faster and more reliable convergence by using Halley's 3rd-order method (cf. the bottom of this page): xk+1 = xk - f f'/[(f')^2 - f f''/2], where all the f-terms are evaluated at the current iterate xk, obviously. That gives quadratic convergence to zero for your first equation (again, this is one order slower than the cubic convergence expected for Halley applied to "nice" functions), and should allow you to investigate the second question, that is, which values of B make the 2nd equation admit of a solution. Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 2009-04-29 at 21:48   2009-04-30, 16:02   #11
davieddy

"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England

145128 Posts Quote:
 Originally Posted by ewmayer Substituting x := (c-d)t as suggested by davieddy, you have: f(x) := -6*exp(x) + x^3 + 3*x^2 + 6*x + 6 = 0
I'm a fan of giving credit where (however mildly) it's due:

If Kevin's astute observation was correct, we get (on expanding exp(x))
a series whose lowest power is x^4.

Although we might have taken a homework thread and run with it,
it would be nice to hear from the OP again, if only to say
"THX but I don't understand a word you're saying". David

PS I think OP's "professor" may well be guilty as charged.

Last fiddled with by davieddy on 2009-04-30 at 16:08   Thread Tools Show Printable Version Email this Page Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post MattcAnderson Puzzles 3 2015-10-04 02:33 davieddy Puzzles 10 2010-05-25 03:43 Primeinator Math 13 2009-11-05 17:30 Citrix Prime Sierpinski Project 37 2009-08-17 06:32 ndpowell Math 18 2005-07-15 22:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 06:34.

Mon Aug 8 06:34:40 UTC 2022 up 32 days, 1:21, 1 user, load averages: 1.45, 1.44, 1.17