I got this asked as a High School interview question and I was CONFUSED

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 30

  • @pavelsolaris1901
    @pavelsolaris1901 25 днів тому +1

    Lambert function is relaly silly stuff. You could come up with e.g. Sillyman function f(x) = x^2 * e^x, and then assume its some enumerated static lookup table. For me really nonsense this Lambert function

  • @KjysosooSoso
    @KjysosooSoso 19 днів тому

    مشكلة أنتم تشرحون شيء بطريقة جيدة....لكن سر متعلم لازم تعطيه نقطة لكل موقف يصادفه يكون جوابه متشابه بنسبة 60٪ هو لا يحتاج يشاهدك هو يفكه لوحده....

  • @RealQinnMalloryu4
    @RealQinnMalloryu4 Місяць тому +1

    {5x+5x ➖ }=10x^2 5^5x^2 2^3^2^3x^2 1^1^1^3x^2 3x^2 (x ➖ 3x+2).

  • @alfredsteele979
    @alfredsteele979 29 днів тому

    You shouldn't complain. If it weren't for videos like this I wouldn't have learned about the Lambert function. Also, please note that at the end he showed why the answer was complex. The grafs didn't intersect

    • @florisv559
      @florisv559 29 днів тому

      I was offering constructive criticism. What's wrong with that? I'd say that people who still need such an expanded reduction of the original equation to the Lambert W function because they aren't comfortable with logarithms etc. yet, shouldn't start with the Lambert W function but should first get comfortable with logs.

  • @tzirvee
    @tzirvee Місяць тому +3

    5^log x = x

  • @RAMPRASADLANDAGE
    @RAMPRASADLANDAGE 28 днів тому

    Make videos on SAT maths questions (vote button)

  • @Snow41174
    @Snow41174 28 днів тому

    You referred to a previous video where you discussed the relationship of complex valued solutions and non-intersecting graphs. BUT WHICH VIDEO?

  • @florisv559
    @florisv559 29 днів тому +4

    You first spoon feed the viewer with simple steps to solve the equation, then you start about the Lambert W function, which is indeed higher maths, then you loosely comment that the equation doesn't have any real solutions, without showing how you come to that conclusion. Try to be more consistent and your videos will improve greatly.

    • @TimBoulette
      @TimBoulette 29 днів тому

      Ask for your money back.

    • @janami-dharmam
      @janami-dharmam 29 днів тому

      how do you know that W(-ln5) does not exist?

    • @florisv559
      @florisv559 29 днів тому

      @@janami-dharmam Like this: f(w) = we^w for real w has an absolute minimum -1/e for w = -1. -ln(5) < -1 < -1/e, so we^w can't get that value. Another way to see it is to view the graphs of the functions x-> x and x -> 5^x - they don't intersect.

    • @Snow41174
      @Snow41174 28 днів тому

      @@florisv559 He referred to a previous video where he discussed the relationship of complex valued solutions and non-intersecting graphs. BUT WHICH VIDEO?

    • @florisv559
      @florisv559 25 днів тому

      @@janami-dharmam W(x) is the inverse of f(x) = xe^x (x >= -1 for reasons explained below, but we will consider x < -1 anyway).
      Now f'(x) = (x+1)e^x, f'(x) = 0 when x = -1, and f(-1) = -1/e. f'(x) < 0 when x < -1 and f'(x) > 0 when x > -1, so
      [1] -1/e is the absolute minimum of f and
      [2] f takes all values between -1/e and 0 twice, which is why it doesn't have an inverse for all x in ℝ.
      Because of [1], f doesn't take any lower values than -1/e, like -ln5 (< -1), and therefore, W(-ln5) isn't a real number.

  • @shymaataleahamed9360
    @shymaataleahamed9360 21 день тому

    Can you expkain the eular num rules. & wlambert function with avarious exercises..... ❤

  • @randyparker5721
    @randyparker5721 29 днів тому

    5^0=0 X=0

    • @fubaralakbar6800
      @fubaralakbar6800 29 днів тому +5

      Any number to the 0 power = 1

    • @KattarMuslim-Revert
      @KattarMuslim-Revert 28 днів тому

      No. X⁰ = 1 ( X€ R)
      And
      5^x≠x (X€R)
      So the solution is complex/ imaginary

  • @Mack-ed1ig
    @Mack-ed1ig Місяць тому +2

    You are solving questions for other people to see not for yourself. For God's sake, writing should be bigger so we can see easily .

  • @edwardhuff4727
    @edwardhuff4727 29 днів тому

    x = -0.01075 - 0.98279 i

    • @edwardhuff4727
      @edwardhuff4727 29 днів тому

      5^x = x
      (e^ln 5)^x = x
      e^(x ln 5) = x
      x ln 5 = ln x
      (ln x)/x = ln 5
      (ln x)/(e^ln x) = ln 5
      (ln x)e^(-ln x) = ln 5
      (-ln x)e^(-ln x) = -ln 5
      W((-ln x)e^(-ln x)) = W(-ln 5)
      -ln x = W(-ln 5)
      ln x = -W(-ln 5)
      x = e^(-W(-ln 5))

    • @janami-dharmam
      @janami-dharmam 29 днів тому

      how??

    • @edwardhuff4727
      @edwardhuff4727 28 днів тому

      ​​@@janami-dharmamWolfram Alpha or Mathematica, or one of many other computer algebra systems. Look at Wikipedia article on CAS.

    • @edwardhuff4727
      @edwardhuff4727 28 днів тому

      Here's more solutions. There are countably many. Sheet refers to the Riemann surface, which is cut into sheets. Each sheet fills the complex plane.
      All of the complex x values satisfy 5^x=x.
      sheet=-5
      x=1.7462696339565527+16.5264299576489i
      x-5^x=10^-14 + 0.i
      sheet=-4
      x=1.5796262962043934+12.610451070467139i
      x-5^x=10^-14 - 10^-15i
      sheet=-3
      x=1.3507162537895936+8.688085376179854i
      x-5^x=10^-15 - 10^-15i
      sheet=-2
      x=0.9815502377624126+4.753430109599094i
      x-5^x=10^-16+10^-16i
      sheet=-1
      x=-0.010750838472555747+0.9827872262285992i
      x-5^x=-10^-17+0.i
      sheet=0
      x=-0.010750838472555783-0.9827872262285992i
      x-5^x=10^-17+0.i
      sheet=1
      x=0.9815502377624126-4.753430109599094i
      x-5^x=10^-16-10^-16i
      sheet=2
      x=1.3507162537895936-8.688085376179854i
      x-5^x=10^-15+10^-15i
      sheet=3
      x=1.5796262962043934-12.610451070467139i
      x-5^x=10^-14+10^-15i
      sheet=4
      x=1.7462696339565527-16.5264299576489i
      x-5^x=10^-14+0.i
      sheet=5
      x=1.8774508360596127-20.43888917162955i
      x-5^x=10^-14+10^-15i