please help me solve this equation for x

crb

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
7
{ [ ( 1 + x )^10 ] - 1} / = 12(x)
please help me solve this equation for x ,
i know that x= 0.0399 , but i don't understand the way it's been solved in the book, {interpolation} , and Maple comes up with something that's totally out of my understanding..........there must be some easier way to solve this , may be by differentiating?????please help.......if i differentiate both sides w.r.t. x , i come up with x = 0.02046 , which is totally wrong.....can eqns be solved by differentiation????any help will be appriciated , thank you
 
Please don't post the same problem multiple times. It only irritates people. Only volunteers work here. Paid providers sometimes respond more quickly. sometimes not.

A derivative will not give you a solution. It can be used to help you find a solution, q.v. Newton's Method.

The interpolation concept is merely keeping the solution between two existing values. There are various ways to select the next value.

I'll think you through it.

Suppose f(x) = {[(1+x)^10] - 1} - 12x

f(0) = 0

I'm guessing we're not looking for that solution.

Knowing where to start is another problem. Various equations may have several solutions, but only some solutions may make sense. For example, your problem may have something to do with calculating an internal rate of returm. Normally, interest rates don't wander too far from 10%. Start there.

f(0.10) = 0.393742
f(0.20) = 2.791736

That seems like the wrong way.

f(0.05) = 0.0288946

That's better, but it's still positive.

f(0.04) = 0.000244285

Well, that was closer than hoped. It may be just luck.

f(0.03) = -0.0160836

Aha! We finally switch signs. There MUST be a solution in (0.03,0.04). It was so close to 0.04, let's decrease the step size a bit.

f(0.039) = -0.001927405

Still negative.

f(0.0399) = 0.000021589

Back to positive. Now we know it's here (0.039,0.0399), and it is likely to be substantially closer to 0.0399. Chage the step size again.

f(0.0398) = -0.000199877

Negative. Changing signs is good. We are on the right track.

f(0.03985) = -0.000089298

That gave us another decimal place, but it's still negative.

f(0.03987) = -0.00004498

Too conservative. It didn't change signs.

f(0.03989) = -0.000000613

Now we're getting somewhere. Still negative!

f(0.039891) = 0.000001607

Whoa! That was way too big a step.

f(0.0398901) = -0.000000391

One more and I think I've maxed out my calculator.

f(0.0398902) = -0.000000169

I wasn't quite as impressed by that as I had hoped. One more should do it.

f(0.0398903) = -0.000000053

You get the idea. Keep going in one direction until it changes sign or otherwise tells you you are going the wrong way. You can use some judgment on what value to pick next or just define a simple algorithm. Bisection is popular.
 
crb said:
and Maple comes up with something that's totally out of my understanding
Enter
Code:
evalf(solve((1+x)^10 - 1 = 12*x))
and pick out the two real solutions (which are listed first).
 
thanks for the help guys...... knowlegde is the only way towards everything that's good.
 
Top