Using Newton-Raphson method, find the solution for $e^{frac{x^2}{4vt}} = 1+frac{x^2}{2vt}$
I need help with solving this difficult fluid dynamic expression. I have tried using rules of logs, symbolab algebra calculator and Wolfram Alpha calculator, and I have got no solution.
How would you solve the following expression USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method for $x$?
$$e^{frac{x^2}{4vt}} = 1+frac{x^2}{2vt}$$
When solving this USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method, the solution is: $x=2.2418sqrt{vt}$
I want to know how you could solve the first expression using the NEWTON-RAPHSON method to get the solution. So could someone please provide a step-by-step solution, by using this method please?
Note: This question was answered, however it was NOT answered using NEWTON-RAPHSON method. It was answered using the Lambert W function, which is a very long and complicated process as compared to the Newton-Raphson method.
algebra-precalculus newton-raphson
New contributor
add a comment |
I need help with solving this difficult fluid dynamic expression. I have tried using rules of logs, symbolab algebra calculator and Wolfram Alpha calculator, and I have got no solution.
How would you solve the following expression USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method for $x$?
$$e^{frac{x^2}{4vt}} = 1+frac{x^2}{2vt}$$
When solving this USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method, the solution is: $x=2.2418sqrt{vt}$
I want to know how you could solve the first expression using the NEWTON-RAPHSON method to get the solution. So could someone please provide a step-by-step solution, by using this method please?
Note: This question was answered, however it was NOT answered using NEWTON-RAPHSON method. It was answered using the Lambert W function, which is a very long and complicated process as compared to the Newton-Raphson method.
algebra-precalculus newton-raphson
New contributor
add a comment |
I need help with solving this difficult fluid dynamic expression. I have tried using rules of logs, symbolab algebra calculator and Wolfram Alpha calculator, and I have got no solution.
How would you solve the following expression USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method for $x$?
$$e^{frac{x^2}{4vt}} = 1+frac{x^2}{2vt}$$
When solving this USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method, the solution is: $x=2.2418sqrt{vt}$
I want to know how you could solve the first expression using the NEWTON-RAPHSON method to get the solution. So could someone please provide a step-by-step solution, by using this method please?
Note: This question was answered, however it was NOT answered using NEWTON-RAPHSON method. It was answered using the Lambert W function, which is a very long and complicated process as compared to the Newton-Raphson method.
algebra-precalculus newton-raphson
New contributor
I need help with solving this difficult fluid dynamic expression. I have tried using rules of logs, symbolab algebra calculator and Wolfram Alpha calculator, and I have got no solution.
How would you solve the following expression USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method for $x$?
$$e^{frac{x^2}{4vt}} = 1+frac{x^2}{2vt}$$
When solving this USING the NEWTON-RAPHSON method, the solution is: $x=2.2418sqrt{vt}$
I want to know how you could solve the first expression using the NEWTON-RAPHSON method to get the solution. So could someone please provide a step-by-step solution, by using this method please?
Note: This question was answered, however it was NOT answered using NEWTON-RAPHSON method. It was answered using the Lambert W function, which is a very long and complicated process as compared to the Newton-Raphson method.
algebra-precalculus newton-raphson
algebra-precalculus newton-raphson
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 2 days ago
Alan Glenn
253
253
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Let $u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ so that
$$ e^u - 1 - 2u = 0. $$
Defining $g(u) = e^u - 1 - 2u, $ we iterate
$$ u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)} ,$$
$$ u mapsto frac{1 +(u-1)e^u}{e^u - 2} $$
? u = 1.25
%9 = 1.250000000000000000000000000
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%10 = 1.256479745141752637179209827
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%11 = 1.256431211361022818343348929
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%12 = 1.256431208626169685666336003
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%13 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%14 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
?
We find that
$$ frac{x^2}{4vt} = 1.256431208626169676982737617 $$ so
$$ x^2 = 5.025724834504678707930950466 ; vt $$
$$ x = 2.241812845557068063953533471 ; sqrt {vt} $$
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
add a comment |
Well, we have:
$$expleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag1$$
Now, we know that we can write:
$$expleft(alpharight)=sum_{text{n}=0}^inftyfrac{alpha^text{n}}{text{n}!}=frac{alpha^0}{0!}+frac{alpha^1}{1!}+frac{alpha^2}{2!}+dots=$$
$$1+alpha+frac{alpha^2}{2}+dotstag2$$
So, for equation $(1)$ we can write:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2+dots=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag3$$
Using the aproximation of three terms we have:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2approx1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}spaceLongleftrightarrowspace$$
$$xapprox0spaceveespace xapproxpm2sqrt{2}cdotsqrt{text{v}cdottext{t}}tag4$$
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
add a comment |
First express this in terms of a single variable: letting $s = x/sqrt{vt}$, the equation becomes
$$ e^{s^2/4} = 1 + s^2/2$$
Now with $f(s) = exp(s^2/4) - (1 + s^2/2)$, $f'(s) = s exp(s^2/4)/2 - s$, and the Newton iteration is
$$ s_{n+1} = s_n - frac{f(s_n)}{f'(s_n)}$$
Note that $s=0$ is also a solution, so you don't want to start too close to that.
Starting with, say, $s_0 = 2$, you just iterate until the numbers get close enough to each other.
$s_1 = 2 - f(2)/f'(2) = 2.392211192$
$s_2 = 2.392211192 - f(2.392211192)/f'(2.392211192) = 2.269512712$
etc.
I find that $s_5$ and $s_6$ differ only in the $9$'th decimal place.
add a comment |
We put $0 le y=x^2/(4vt)$ and look for the non-negative zeros of the function $f(y)$
$$
left{ matrix{
f(y) = e^{,y} - 2y - 1 = 0 hfill cr
f'(y) = e^{,y} - 2quad Rightarrow quad min f(y):;y = ln 2 hfill cr
0 < f''(y) = e^{,y} hfill cr} right.
$$
Clearly, $f(y)$ is convex, has a negative minimum at $y=ln2$, thus it has two zeros.
One of them is at $y=0$ and the other will be past the minimum.
Since for $ln2 < y$ the function is increasing we can apply Newton-Raphson
method to find the second zero, provided that the starting point $y_0$ be to the right of the minimum.
We can choose $y_0=2$ for instance, and then start the recursion
$$
eqalign{
& {{f(y_0 )} over {y_1 - y_0 }} = f'(y_0 )quad Rightarrow quad cr
& Rightarrow quad y_1 = y_0 + {{f(y_0 )} over {f'(y_0 )}} = y_0 + {{e^{,y_0 } - 2y_0 - 1} over {e^{,y_0 } - 2}}quad Rightarrow cr
& Rightarrow quad y_{n + 1} = y_n + {{e^{,y_{,n} } - 2y_n - 1} over {e^{,y_{,n} } - 2}} cr}
$$
Of course, once found a satisfactory value for $y$, you can easily
convert it back to $x$
add a comment |
Just as Will Jagy did, let$u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ to make the equation $e^u - 1 - 2u = 0$.
So, let consider that you look for the zero's of function
$$f(u)=e^u - 1 - 2u $$ for which
$$f'(u)=e^u - 2 qquad text{and} qquad f''(u)=e^u > ,,forall u$$
The first derivative cancels when $u=log(2)$. You can get an estimate of the root builiding the Taylor series at this point. This would give
$$e^u - 1 - 2u =(1-2 log (2))+(u-log (2))^2+Oleft((u-log (2))^3right)$$ Ignoring the gigher order terms, you then have as an estimate
$$u_0=log(2)+sqrt{2 log (2)-1}approx 1.31467$$ With this estimate, you can now use Newton method
$$u_{n+1}=u_n-frac{f(u_n)}{f'(u_n)}=frac{e^{u_n} (u_n-1)+1}{e^{u_n}-2}$$ and get, for twelve significant figures, the following iterates
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.31467301359 \
1 & 1.26002526328 \
2 & 1.25644611685 \
3 & 1.25643120888 \
4 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
One of the important points when you use Newton method is to get a "reasonable" estimates.
You will notice in the table that, at no time, we overshoot the solution because we started at a point whe $f(x_0) times f''(x_0) > 0$ (Darboux theorem).
Starting instead with $x_0=1$, the iterates would have been
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.00000000000 \
1 & color{red}{1.39221119118} \
2 & 1.27395717022 \
3 & 1.25677778598 \
4 & 1.25643134800 \
5 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Alan Glenn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3060838%2fusing-newton-raphson-method-find-the-solution-for-e-fracx24vt-1-fra%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Let $u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ so that
$$ e^u - 1 - 2u = 0. $$
Defining $g(u) = e^u - 1 - 2u, $ we iterate
$$ u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)} ,$$
$$ u mapsto frac{1 +(u-1)e^u}{e^u - 2} $$
? u = 1.25
%9 = 1.250000000000000000000000000
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%10 = 1.256479745141752637179209827
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%11 = 1.256431211361022818343348929
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%12 = 1.256431208626169685666336003
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%13 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%14 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
?
We find that
$$ frac{x^2}{4vt} = 1.256431208626169676982737617 $$ so
$$ x^2 = 5.025724834504678707930950466 ; vt $$
$$ x = 2.241812845557068063953533471 ; sqrt {vt} $$
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
add a comment |
Let $u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ so that
$$ e^u - 1 - 2u = 0. $$
Defining $g(u) = e^u - 1 - 2u, $ we iterate
$$ u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)} ,$$
$$ u mapsto frac{1 +(u-1)e^u}{e^u - 2} $$
? u = 1.25
%9 = 1.250000000000000000000000000
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%10 = 1.256479745141752637179209827
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%11 = 1.256431211361022818343348929
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%12 = 1.256431208626169685666336003
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%13 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%14 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
?
We find that
$$ frac{x^2}{4vt} = 1.256431208626169676982737617 $$ so
$$ x^2 = 5.025724834504678707930950466 ; vt $$
$$ x = 2.241812845557068063953533471 ; sqrt {vt} $$
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
add a comment |
Let $u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ so that
$$ e^u - 1 - 2u = 0. $$
Defining $g(u) = e^u - 1 - 2u, $ we iterate
$$ u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)} ,$$
$$ u mapsto frac{1 +(u-1)e^u}{e^u - 2} $$
? u = 1.25
%9 = 1.250000000000000000000000000
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%10 = 1.256479745141752637179209827
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%11 = 1.256431211361022818343348929
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%12 = 1.256431208626169685666336003
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%13 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%14 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
?
We find that
$$ frac{x^2}{4vt} = 1.256431208626169676982737617 $$ so
$$ x^2 = 5.025724834504678707930950466 ; vt $$
$$ x = 2.241812845557068063953533471 ; sqrt {vt} $$
Let $u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ so that
$$ e^u - 1 - 2u = 0. $$
Defining $g(u) = e^u - 1 - 2u, $ we iterate
$$ u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)} ,$$
$$ u mapsto frac{1 +(u-1)e^u}{e^u - 2} $$
? u = 1.25
%9 = 1.250000000000000000000000000
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%10 = 1.256479745141752637179209827
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%11 = 1.256431211361022818343348929
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%12 = 1.256431208626169685666336003
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%13 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
? u = ( 1 + (u-1) * exp(u) ) / (exp(u)-2 )
%14 = 1.256431208626169676982737617
?
We find that
$$ frac{x^2}{4vt} = 1.256431208626169676982737617 $$ so
$$ x^2 = 5.025724834504678707930950466 ; vt $$
$$ x = 2.241812845557068063953533471 ; sqrt {vt} $$
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Will Jagy
102k599199
102k599199
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
Thank you very much @Will
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
My final question is, when choosing the initial value 'u', do we always plot the '$u mapsto u - frac{g(u)}{g'(u)}$' expression and also plot the 'y=u' expression and wherever they intercept we choose that as the initial value of u?
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn I added in a picture of $y=e^u - 1 - 2u,$ and I do recommend graphing that. That is where I got the initial estimate 1.25, looking at that picture.
– Will Jagy
2 days ago
add a comment |
Well, we have:
$$expleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag1$$
Now, we know that we can write:
$$expleft(alpharight)=sum_{text{n}=0}^inftyfrac{alpha^text{n}}{text{n}!}=frac{alpha^0}{0!}+frac{alpha^1}{1!}+frac{alpha^2}{2!}+dots=$$
$$1+alpha+frac{alpha^2}{2}+dotstag2$$
So, for equation $(1)$ we can write:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2+dots=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag3$$
Using the aproximation of three terms we have:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2approx1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}spaceLongleftrightarrowspace$$
$$xapprox0spaceveespace xapproxpm2sqrt{2}cdotsqrt{text{v}cdottext{t}}tag4$$
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
add a comment |
Well, we have:
$$expleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag1$$
Now, we know that we can write:
$$expleft(alpharight)=sum_{text{n}=0}^inftyfrac{alpha^text{n}}{text{n}!}=frac{alpha^0}{0!}+frac{alpha^1}{1!}+frac{alpha^2}{2!}+dots=$$
$$1+alpha+frac{alpha^2}{2}+dotstag2$$
So, for equation $(1)$ we can write:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2+dots=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag3$$
Using the aproximation of three terms we have:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2approx1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}spaceLongleftrightarrowspace$$
$$xapprox0spaceveespace xapproxpm2sqrt{2}cdotsqrt{text{v}cdottext{t}}tag4$$
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
add a comment |
Well, we have:
$$expleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag1$$
Now, we know that we can write:
$$expleft(alpharight)=sum_{text{n}=0}^inftyfrac{alpha^text{n}}{text{n}!}=frac{alpha^0}{0!}+frac{alpha^1}{1!}+frac{alpha^2}{2!}+dots=$$
$$1+alpha+frac{alpha^2}{2}+dotstag2$$
So, for equation $(1)$ we can write:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2+dots=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag3$$
Using the aproximation of three terms we have:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2approx1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}spaceLongleftrightarrowspace$$
$$xapprox0spaceveespace xapproxpm2sqrt{2}cdotsqrt{text{v}cdottext{t}}tag4$$
Well, we have:
$$expleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag1$$
Now, we know that we can write:
$$expleft(alpharight)=sum_{text{n}=0}^inftyfrac{alpha^text{n}}{text{n}!}=frac{alpha^0}{0!}+frac{alpha^1}{1!}+frac{alpha^2}{2!}+dots=$$
$$1+alpha+frac{alpha^2}{2}+dotstag2$$
So, for equation $(1)$ we can write:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2+dots=1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}tag3$$
Using the aproximation of three terms we have:
$$1+frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}+frac{1}{2}cdotleft(frac{x^2}{4cdottext{v}cdot t}right)^2approx1+frac{x^2}{2cdottext{v}cdot t}spaceLongleftrightarrowspace$$
$$xapprox0spaceveespace xapproxpm2sqrt{2}cdotsqrt{text{v}cdottext{t}}tag4$$
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Jan
21.7k31240
21.7k31240
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
add a comment |
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
That is the wrong answer. $2sqrt{2}=2.828$ which is not the same as 2.2418.
– Alan Glenn
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
@AlanGlenn It is not wrong!
– Jan
2 days ago
add a comment |
First express this in terms of a single variable: letting $s = x/sqrt{vt}$, the equation becomes
$$ e^{s^2/4} = 1 + s^2/2$$
Now with $f(s) = exp(s^2/4) - (1 + s^2/2)$, $f'(s) = s exp(s^2/4)/2 - s$, and the Newton iteration is
$$ s_{n+1} = s_n - frac{f(s_n)}{f'(s_n)}$$
Note that $s=0$ is also a solution, so you don't want to start too close to that.
Starting with, say, $s_0 = 2$, you just iterate until the numbers get close enough to each other.
$s_1 = 2 - f(2)/f'(2) = 2.392211192$
$s_2 = 2.392211192 - f(2.392211192)/f'(2.392211192) = 2.269512712$
etc.
I find that $s_5$ and $s_6$ differ only in the $9$'th decimal place.
add a comment |
First express this in terms of a single variable: letting $s = x/sqrt{vt}$, the equation becomes
$$ e^{s^2/4} = 1 + s^2/2$$
Now with $f(s) = exp(s^2/4) - (1 + s^2/2)$, $f'(s) = s exp(s^2/4)/2 - s$, and the Newton iteration is
$$ s_{n+1} = s_n - frac{f(s_n)}{f'(s_n)}$$
Note that $s=0$ is also a solution, so you don't want to start too close to that.
Starting with, say, $s_0 = 2$, you just iterate until the numbers get close enough to each other.
$s_1 = 2 - f(2)/f'(2) = 2.392211192$
$s_2 = 2.392211192 - f(2.392211192)/f'(2.392211192) = 2.269512712$
etc.
I find that $s_5$ and $s_6$ differ only in the $9$'th decimal place.
add a comment |
First express this in terms of a single variable: letting $s = x/sqrt{vt}$, the equation becomes
$$ e^{s^2/4} = 1 + s^2/2$$
Now with $f(s) = exp(s^2/4) - (1 + s^2/2)$, $f'(s) = s exp(s^2/4)/2 - s$, and the Newton iteration is
$$ s_{n+1} = s_n - frac{f(s_n)}{f'(s_n)}$$
Note that $s=0$ is also a solution, so you don't want to start too close to that.
Starting with, say, $s_0 = 2$, you just iterate until the numbers get close enough to each other.
$s_1 = 2 - f(2)/f'(2) = 2.392211192$
$s_2 = 2.392211192 - f(2.392211192)/f'(2.392211192) = 2.269512712$
etc.
I find that $s_5$ and $s_6$ differ only in the $9$'th decimal place.
First express this in terms of a single variable: letting $s = x/sqrt{vt}$, the equation becomes
$$ e^{s^2/4} = 1 + s^2/2$$
Now with $f(s) = exp(s^2/4) - (1 + s^2/2)$, $f'(s) = s exp(s^2/4)/2 - s$, and the Newton iteration is
$$ s_{n+1} = s_n - frac{f(s_n)}{f'(s_n)}$$
Note that $s=0$ is also a solution, so you don't want to start too close to that.
Starting with, say, $s_0 = 2$, you just iterate until the numbers get close enough to each other.
$s_1 = 2 - f(2)/f'(2) = 2.392211192$
$s_2 = 2.392211192 - f(2.392211192)/f'(2.392211192) = 2.269512712$
etc.
I find that $s_5$ and $s_6$ differ only in the $9$'th decimal place.
answered 2 days ago
Robert Israel
318k23208457
318k23208457
add a comment |
add a comment |
We put $0 le y=x^2/(4vt)$ and look for the non-negative zeros of the function $f(y)$
$$
left{ matrix{
f(y) = e^{,y} - 2y - 1 = 0 hfill cr
f'(y) = e^{,y} - 2quad Rightarrow quad min f(y):;y = ln 2 hfill cr
0 < f''(y) = e^{,y} hfill cr} right.
$$
Clearly, $f(y)$ is convex, has a negative minimum at $y=ln2$, thus it has two zeros.
One of them is at $y=0$ and the other will be past the minimum.
Since for $ln2 < y$ the function is increasing we can apply Newton-Raphson
method to find the second zero, provided that the starting point $y_0$ be to the right of the minimum.
We can choose $y_0=2$ for instance, and then start the recursion
$$
eqalign{
& {{f(y_0 )} over {y_1 - y_0 }} = f'(y_0 )quad Rightarrow quad cr
& Rightarrow quad y_1 = y_0 + {{f(y_0 )} over {f'(y_0 )}} = y_0 + {{e^{,y_0 } - 2y_0 - 1} over {e^{,y_0 } - 2}}quad Rightarrow cr
& Rightarrow quad y_{n + 1} = y_n + {{e^{,y_{,n} } - 2y_n - 1} over {e^{,y_{,n} } - 2}} cr}
$$
Of course, once found a satisfactory value for $y$, you can easily
convert it back to $x$
add a comment |
We put $0 le y=x^2/(4vt)$ and look for the non-negative zeros of the function $f(y)$
$$
left{ matrix{
f(y) = e^{,y} - 2y - 1 = 0 hfill cr
f'(y) = e^{,y} - 2quad Rightarrow quad min f(y):;y = ln 2 hfill cr
0 < f''(y) = e^{,y} hfill cr} right.
$$
Clearly, $f(y)$ is convex, has a negative minimum at $y=ln2$, thus it has two zeros.
One of them is at $y=0$ and the other will be past the minimum.
Since for $ln2 < y$ the function is increasing we can apply Newton-Raphson
method to find the second zero, provided that the starting point $y_0$ be to the right of the minimum.
We can choose $y_0=2$ for instance, and then start the recursion
$$
eqalign{
& {{f(y_0 )} over {y_1 - y_0 }} = f'(y_0 )quad Rightarrow quad cr
& Rightarrow quad y_1 = y_0 + {{f(y_0 )} over {f'(y_0 )}} = y_0 + {{e^{,y_0 } - 2y_0 - 1} over {e^{,y_0 } - 2}}quad Rightarrow cr
& Rightarrow quad y_{n + 1} = y_n + {{e^{,y_{,n} } - 2y_n - 1} over {e^{,y_{,n} } - 2}} cr}
$$
Of course, once found a satisfactory value for $y$, you can easily
convert it back to $x$
add a comment |
We put $0 le y=x^2/(4vt)$ and look for the non-negative zeros of the function $f(y)$
$$
left{ matrix{
f(y) = e^{,y} - 2y - 1 = 0 hfill cr
f'(y) = e^{,y} - 2quad Rightarrow quad min f(y):;y = ln 2 hfill cr
0 < f''(y) = e^{,y} hfill cr} right.
$$
Clearly, $f(y)$ is convex, has a negative minimum at $y=ln2$, thus it has two zeros.
One of them is at $y=0$ and the other will be past the minimum.
Since for $ln2 < y$ the function is increasing we can apply Newton-Raphson
method to find the second zero, provided that the starting point $y_0$ be to the right of the minimum.
We can choose $y_0=2$ for instance, and then start the recursion
$$
eqalign{
& {{f(y_0 )} over {y_1 - y_0 }} = f'(y_0 )quad Rightarrow quad cr
& Rightarrow quad y_1 = y_0 + {{f(y_0 )} over {f'(y_0 )}} = y_0 + {{e^{,y_0 } - 2y_0 - 1} over {e^{,y_0 } - 2}}quad Rightarrow cr
& Rightarrow quad y_{n + 1} = y_n + {{e^{,y_{,n} } - 2y_n - 1} over {e^{,y_{,n} } - 2}} cr}
$$
Of course, once found a satisfactory value for $y$, you can easily
convert it back to $x$
We put $0 le y=x^2/(4vt)$ and look for the non-negative zeros of the function $f(y)$
$$
left{ matrix{
f(y) = e^{,y} - 2y - 1 = 0 hfill cr
f'(y) = e^{,y} - 2quad Rightarrow quad min f(y):;y = ln 2 hfill cr
0 < f''(y) = e^{,y} hfill cr} right.
$$
Clearly, $f(y)$ is convex, has a negative minimum at $y=ln2$, thus it has two zeros.
One of them is at $y=0$ and the other will be past the minimum.
Since for $ln2 < y$ the function is increasing we can apply Newton-Raphson
method to find the second zero, provided that the starting point $y_0$ be to the right of the minimum.
We can choose $y_0=2$ for instance, and then start the recursion
$$
eqalign{
& {{f(y_0 )} over {y_1 - y_0 }} = f'(y_0 )quad Rightarrow quad cr
& Rightarrow quad y_1 = y_0 + {{f(y_0 )} over {f'(y_0 )}} = y_0 + {{e^{,y_0 } - 2y_0 - 1} over {e^{,y_0 } - 2}}quad Rightarrow cr
& Rightarrow quad y_{n + 1} = y_n + {{e^{,y_{,n} } - 2y_n - 1} over {e^{,y_{,n} } - 2}} cr}
$$
Of course, once found a satisfactory value for $y$, you can easily
convert it back to $x$
answered 2 days ago
G Cab
18k31237
18k31237
add a comment |
add a comment |
Just as Will Jagy did, let$u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ to make the equation $e^u - 1 - 2u = 0$.
So, let consider that you look for the zero's of function
$$f(u)=e^u - 1 - 2u $$ for which
$$f'(u)=e^u - 2 qquad text{and} qquad f''(u)=e^u > ,,forall u$$
The first derivative cancels when $u=log(2)$. You can get an estimate of the root builiding the Taylor series at this point. This would give
$$e^u - 1 - 2u =(1-2 log (2))+(u-log (2))^2+Oleft((u-log (2))^3right)$$ Ignoring the gigher order terms, you then have as an estimate
$$u_0=log(2)+sqrt{2 log (2)-1}approx 1.31467$$ With this estimate, you can now use Newton method
$$u_{n+1}=u_n-frac{f(u_n)}{f'(u_n)}=frac{e^{u_n} (u_n-1)+1}{e^{u_n}-2}$$ and get, for twelve significant figures, the following iterates
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.31467301359 \
1 & 1.26002526328 \
2 & 1.25644611685 \
3 & 1.25643120888 \
4 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
One of the important points when you use Newton method is to get a "reasonable" estimates.
You will notice in the table that, at no time, we overshoot the solution because we started at a point whe $f(x_0) times f''(x_0) > 0$ (Darboux theorem).
Starting instead with $x_0=1$, the iterates would have been
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.00000000000 \
1 & color{red}{1.39221119118} \
2 & 1.27395717022 \
3 & 1.25677778598 \
4 & 1.25643134800 \
5 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
Just as Will Jagy did, let$u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ to make the equation $e^u - 1 - 2u = 0$.
So, let consider that you look for the zero's of function
$$f(u)=e^u - 1 - 2u $$ for which
$$f'(u)=e^u - 2 qquad text{and} qquad f''(u)=e^u > ,,forall u$$
The first derivative cancels when $u=log(2)$. You can get an estimate of the root builiding the Taylor series at this point. This would give
$$e^u - 1 - 2u =(1-2 log (2))+(u-log (2))^2+Oleft((u-log (2))^3right)$$ Ignoring the gigher order terms, you then have as an estimate
$$u_0=log(2)+sqrt{2 log (2)-1}approx 1.31467$$ With this estimate, you can now use Newton method
$$u_{n+1}=u_n-frac{f(u_n)}{f'(u_n)}=frac{e^{u_n} (u_n-1)+1}{e^{u_n}-2}$$ and get, for twelve significant figures, the following iterates
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.31467301359 \
1 & 1.26002526328 \
2 & 1.25644611685 \
3 & 1.25643120888 \
4 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
One of the important points when you use Newton method is to get a "reasonable" estimates.
You will notice in the table that, at no time, we overshoot the solution because we started at a point whe $f(x_0) times f''(x_0) > 0$ (Darboux theorem).
Starting instead with $x_0=1$, the iterates would have been
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.00000000000 \
1 & color{red}{1.39221119118} \
2 & 1.27395717022 \
3 & 1.25677778598 \
4 & 1.25643134800 \
5 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
Just as Will Jagy did, let$u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ to make the equation $e^u - 1 - 2u = 0$.
So, let consider that you look for the zero's of function
$$f(u)=e^u - 1 - 2u $$ for which
$$f'(u)=e^u - 2 qquad text{and} qquad f''(u)=e^u > ,,forall u$$
The first derivative cancels when $u=log(2)$. You can get an estimate of the root builiding the Taylor series at this point. This would give
$$e^u - 1 - 2u =(1-2 log (2))+(u-log (2))^2+Oleft((u-log (2))^3right)$$ Ignoring the gigher order terms, you then have as an estimate
$$u_0=log(2)+sqrt{2 log (2)-1}approx 1.31467$$ With this estimate, you can now use Newton method
$$u_{n+1}=u_n-frac{f(u_n)}{f'(u_n)}=frac{e^{u_n} (u_n-1)+1}{e^{u_n}-2}$$ and get, for twelve significant figures, the following iterates
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.31467301359 \
1 & 1.26002526328 \
2 & 1.25644611685 \
3 & 1.25643120888 \
4 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
One of the important points when you use Newton method is to get a "reasonable" estimates.
You will notice in the table that, at no time, we overshoot the solution because we started at a point whe $f(x_0) times f''(x_0) > 0$ (Darboux theorem).
Starting instead with $x_0=1$, the iterates would have been
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.00000000000 \
1 & color{red}{1.39221119118} \
2 & 1.27395717022 \
3 & 1.25677778598 \
4 & 1.25643134800 \
5 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
Just as Will Jagy did, let$u = frac{x^2}{4 v t}$ to make the equation $e^u - 1 - 2u = 0$.
So, let consider that you look for the zero's of function
$$f(u)=e^u - 1 - 2u $$ for which
$$f'(u)=e^u - 2 qquad text{and} qquad f''(u)=e^u > ,,forall u$$
The first derivative cancels when $u=log(2)$. You can get an estimate of the root builiding the Taylor series at this point. This would give
$$e^u - 1 - 2u =(1-2 log (2))+(u-log (2))^2+Oleft((u-log (2))^3right)$$ Ignoring the gigher order terms, you then have as an estimate
$$u_0=log(2)+sqrt{2 log (2)-1}approx 1.31467$$ With this estimate, you can now use Newton method
$$u_{n+1}=u_n-frac{f(u_n)}{f'(u_n)}=frac{e^{u_n} (u_n-1)+1}{e^{u_n}-2}$$ and get, for twelve significant figures, the following iterates
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.31467301359 \
1 & 1.26002526328 \
2 & 1.25644611685 \
3 & 1.25643120888 \
4 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
One of the important points when you use Newton method is to get a "reasonable" estimates.
You will notice in the table that, at no time, we overshoot the solution because we started at a point whe $f(x_0) times f''(x_0) > 0$ (Darboux theorem).
Starting instead with $x_0=1$, the iterates would have been
$$left(
begin{array}{cc}
n & u_n \
0 & 1.00000000000 \
1 & color{red}{1.39221119118} \
2 & 1.27395717022 \
3 & 1.25677778598 \
4 & 1.25643134800 \
5 & 1.25643120863
end{array}
right)$$
answered yesterday
Claude Leibovici
119k1157132
119k1157132
add a comment |
add a comment |
Alan Glenn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Alan Glenn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Alan Glenn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Alan Glenn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3060838%2fusing-newton-raphson-method-find-the-solution-for-e-fracx24vt-1-fra%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown