Asked by Rabin kaji
slove : x^2=4^x
Answers
Answered by
Reiny
x^2=4^x
let's use logs
log (x^2) = log (4^x)
2 log x = x log 4 , not getting anywhere, can't isolate x
graphing it to approximate ....
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E2%3D4%5Ex
shows a solution at x = appr -.64
How about Newton's method?
let y = x^2 - 4^x
dy/dx = 2x - (ln4)(4^x)
new x = x - (x^2 - 4^x)/(2x - ln4(4^x))
start with x = -.64
x ... newx
-.64 -.641186
-.641186 -.641185744
-.641185744 -.641185744, wow just 3 steps!!
check:
-.641185744^2 = .411119159
4^-.641185744 = .41119159
<b>x = -.641185744 </b>
let's use logs
log (x^2) = log (4^x)
2 log x = x log 4 , not getting anywhere, can't isolate x
graphing it to approximate ....
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E2%3D4%5Ex
shows a solution at x = appr -.64
How about Newton's method?
let y = x^2 - 4^x
dy/dx = 2x - (ln4)(4^x)
new x = x - (x^2 - 4^x)/(2x - ln4(4^x))
start with x = -.64
x ... newx
-.64 -.641186
-.641186 -.641185744
-.641185744 -.641185744, wow just 3 steps!!
check:
-.641185744^2 = .411119159
4^-.641185744 = .41119159
<b>x = -.641185744 </b>
Answered by
Steve
Just to chime in, in case you haven't studied calculus yet, there's always the bisection method. Let
f(x) = x^2 - 4^x
You want to find where f(x) = 0. Since
f(-1) > 0
f(0) < 0
f(x) = 0 for some x in the interval [-1,0]
so, start guessing at the center of the interval. pick whichever half of the interval the change of sign appears in.
f(-0.75) = 0.2089
f(-0.625) = -0.2982
f(-0.6875) = 0.0871
f(-0.65625) = 0.2804
... 9 steps later ...
f(-0.6412353515625) = 0.000091888
As you can see, it converges rather more slowly than Newton's method. It took 13 iterations to get the same accuracy of 3 steps with Newton's method.
f(x) = x^2 - 4^x
You want to find where f(x) = 0. Since
f(-1) > 0
f(0) < 0
f(x) = 0 for some x in the interval [-1,0]
so, start guessing at the center of the interval. pick whichever half of the interval the change of sign appears in.
f(-0.75) = 0.2089
f(-0.625) = -0.2982
f(-0.6875) = 0.0871
f(-0.65625) = 0.2804
... 9 steps later ...
f(-0.6412353515625) = 0.000091888
As you can see, it converges rather more slowly than Newton's method. It took 13 iterations to get the same accuracy of 3 steps with Newton's method.
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.