Simple Yet Difficult. How to Solve Using Lambert W Function

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 14 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 11

  • @jim2376
    @jim2376 Рік тому +2

    Cool beans! Never knew about the Lambert W function. This was a very helpful introductory video to the function. Thanks.

  • @XanderAnimations
    @XanderAnimations 2 місяці тому +1

    Fun fact: e^W(lnx) is the formula to find the *Super Square Root!*
    Notice how x^x is a tetration equation, it's x tetrated to 2 or x^^2.
    The solution to x^^2 = a is the super square root (ssqrt) of a, or e^W(lna)

  • @homoexhumo
    @homoexhumo Рік тому +2

    I set x=1 and n=2
    Then I apply the recursive relationship:
    x=(n^(1/x) + x)/2
    As it stands, this method converges fairly quickly to the more general problem x^x = n for some range of real values ​​of n. It has been many years since I worked on this problem, and I don't remember much of the details, except that the above method undergoes many changes depending on the range of values ​​of n. The boundaries of these values, if I remember correctly, depend on the constant e. In general, this method and its variants also work for complex values ​​of n.

  • @ayushoriginal
    @ayushoriginal 6 місяців тому +1

    Simply assume x = 2
    Thus square root both side you get the answer...
    Which is x = √2
    I.e 1.414 approximately

    • @seroujghazarian6343
      @seroujghazarian6343 4 місяці тому

      x^x=sqrt(2)^sqrt(2) can't be 2 as by using the Gelfond-Schneider theorem, we can prove that sqrt(2)^sqrt(2) is transcendental

  • @buckyjennings8854
    @buckyjennings8854 2 місяці тому

    What is the point if you still need a computer program to give you the value?

    • @NichaelCramer
      @NichaelCramer Місяць тому

      @@buckyjennings8854 : I was concerned about this initially as well, but rather than thinking of it as “needing a computer”, think of it “as needing a table of the values of the W function”.
      In other words this is no different from, for example, if the solution were of the form “X = ln(5)” or of the form“X = cos(5dg)” (or, for that matter, “x = sqrt(5)”).
      In all these these cases you’ve just expressed your answer in terms of a constant value of a previously well-defined function.

  • @marlydahl
    @marlydahl Рік тому +1

    So, that's what we call magic!

  • @souzasilva5471
    @souzasilva5471 9 місяців тому

    How do you find 16 in Lambert's formula? Not how you find the indices 0 and -1 of W.

  • @Gezraf
    @Gezraf 7 місяців тому +1

    how is that difficult tho