Application of the Lambert W Function (Part 2)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
  • In this Video I am going to show you how to apply the Lambert W Function. I am explaining the basic tool when it comes to application of the Lambert W Function. Watching this Video you will be ably to recognize and solve some basic problems using the Lambert W Function.
    For the Lambert W Function Introduction go to: • What is the Lambert W ...
    Follow me on Instagram: / intellecta9
    If you want to see more videos like this, please like and SUBSCRIBE.
    Don´t hesitate to click the ``BELL ICON`` next to the SUBSCRIBE button to be notified of UPLOADS.🔔

КОМЕНТАРІ • 75

  • @intellecta2686
    @intellecta2686  3 роки тому +25

    Guys just to point out, the solution at the end is positive, x = 0.309. If you didn't know a negative times a negative is a positive 😁
    I apologize for the mistake made due to lack of concentration.
    Conclusion: when you study take breaks and drink coffee for better concentration :)
    Thanks Ya Bec for noticing and reporting 🙂

  • @BalazsBosze1
    @BalazsBosze1 9 місяців тому +8

    There's another positive x solution, x=W_-1_(-1/3), which is about 0.756. W can be nasty with its multiple values. This other solution also can be checked with graphing 6x and e^2x. And I wish UA-cam made easier commenting math functions... 🙂

    • @JoseVieira-hs9qo
      @JoseVieira-hs9qo 5 місяців тому +1

      Yes, as -1/3 is a value between -1/e and 0, product log function will have 2 real solutions, one per branch, W0 and W-1.

    • @antosandras
      @antosandras 18 днів тому

      Seems "Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach." It is quite easy to see that 6x is not a tangent to e^2x, so the equation has either 2 or 0 solutions.

  • @davidlyttle2410
    @davidlyttle2410 3 роки тому +6

    Got interested in the Lambert function recently. Your explanation of it is the best I have seen online so thank you and keep up the good work. David Lyttle

  • @mtc-j9i
    @mtc-j9i 4 місяці тому

    Thank you! I watched both videos and finally understand how this works!!

  • @romanpahuacho
    @romanpahuacho 3 місяці тому

    Thanks a lot.

  • @mathsplus01
    @mathsplus01 Рік тому +3

    Thank you. Elegant and clear. I'm a new subscriber 🙌👍

  • @johnwindisch1956
    @johnwindisch1956 2 роки тому

    The clearest explanation I have seen.
    You should put a light diffuser in front of light to reduce glare on greenboard. Stay safe

  • @rajneeshsingh5304
    @rajneeshsingh5304 3 роки тому +1

    Great video....Love and respect from India!!🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому +1

      Thank you, I appreciate it 🙏

    • @rajneeshsingh5304
      @rajneeshsingh5304 3 роки тому

      @@intellecta2686 alwys most wlcm mam,,keep shining! 🤟🤟

  • @maxivides
    @maxivides Рік тому

    Wow, I have learned another way to solve for x. Thanks.

  • @incomestockinvesting5626
    @incomestockinvesting5626 3 роки тому +2

    Haha. I tried so hard to follow along. You are so much better at math than me. ☺️ enjoyed your video. Keep them coming 👍

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому +1

      Heheh this is not very common math, there are not many people who use this, mostly programmers. It's totally normal for you to look complicated :)

  • @akihuanakamori2578
    @akihuanakamori2578 Рік тому +3

    hi, if i dont want to use wolfram, how do i compute W(-1/3) munally..

    • @gregorymirsky8707
      @gregorymirsky8707 6 місяців тому +1

      You cannot do that since the Lambert function has no analytical solution!

    • @JoseVieira-hs9qo
      @JoseVieira-hs9qo 5 місяців тому

      @@gregorymirsky8707 but you can numerically but that is what wolfram does....

  • @savasalpdo
    @savasalpdo 5 місяців тому

    As a result of the solution of this problem: When we look at the Wolfram table, which of the values W(-1/3 ) = -1.512135 and -0.619061 will we accept as the solution to our problem? You got the value - 0.619061. From where ? I couldn't understand this. Also, can you give me information about the application (used on phones or computers) where I can obtain the Wolfram table, which is the most used in solving such problems. Thank you.
    I wish you successful work. Kind regards.

  • @emilianorosario5935
    @emilianorosario5935 9 місяців тому

    Man the Lambert W function is so cool, I wish it was real.

  • @MathForEverybody
    @MathForEverybody 4 місяці тому

    Thank you!

  • @fouadkobeissi4537
    @fouadkobeissi4537 5 місяців тому +1

    Please use good chalk on the board

  • @marcelgranda1341
    @marcelgranda1341 Рік тому

    Excelente. Explicas muy bien.

  • @leonardonabinger
    @leonardonabinger 8 місяців тому

    It's really difficult to pay attention to this with such beauty in front of the board. ;)

  • @salvatorecosta875
    @salvatorecosta875 7 місяців тому +1

    but -1/3 >-1/e then 2 solutions, I think x≈0.309 x ≈0.756. How is it possible calculate Lambert function if I haven't Wolframe? Thanks

  • @guidoreuter6032
    @guidoreuter6032 7 місяців тому

    A smile once in a whiles would be most becoming .. 😁

  • @rmw6151
    @rmw6151 3 роки тому

    Thank you for making this video. Very well explained . What it does not do is to explain the product log function i.e. what exactly is it etc...
    Please make more math videos, I particularly liked your historical excursion i.e. what does w mean and where did it come from etc.

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому

      Thank you for the comment. I appreciate it. I will definitely be making more math videos, more often than I have so far.

  • @pavelsolaris1901
    @pavelsolaris1901 10 днів тому

    Since solution x = -0.3, and so 6*x is also negative, but e^(x) > 0, and so initial equation is not fulfilled, because then: 6 * (-0.3 ) = e^(-0.6) would need to be true

  • @Hjominbonrun
    @Hjominbonrun 6 місяців тому

    What is W(-1/3) it just came out of nowhere and we should go to wolfram to answer that question?
    Also, the solution, is it the only solution or is it good enough to just supply the one solution if we can get it?

  • @anothervoice5495
    @anothervoice5495 3 роки тому +1

    Very clear presentation.

  • @stefanotonon5265
    @stefanotonon5265 3 роки тому

    Ottimo video!

  • @doltifantara
    @doltifantara 2 роки тому +1

    good ideas, Lambert W is a confusing function but its getting a bit clearer😔

  • @purim_sakamoto
    @purim_sakamoto 3 роки тому

    とても分かりやすかったです
    ところで、先生の動画は複素平面への理解を大変助けると思います

  • @edgareduardomatamorosizagu7291
    @edgareduardomatamorosizagu7291 2 роки тому

    Thanks

  • @pedgmarq
    @pedgmarq 2 роки тому

    very easy for me........

  • @tsurcurlyhair
    @tsurcurlyhair 2 роки тому +1

    If you graph this two functions you can see that they touch each other twice, therefore there are two solutions for this equation. What's the second solution?

    • @loogoos4894
      @loogoos4894 Рік тому

      Lambert W_(-1)(1/3)/-2 is the other solution

  • @dunabogdany
    @dunabogdany 2 роки тому +1

    Oh yeah, the solution of 6x =e^(2x) helps me to have a better life.

    • @disgracedmilo
      @disgracedmilo 10 місяців тому +1

      it's those with a disinterest to learning like you who constantly complain about not knowing

  • @naayou99
    @naayou99 8 місяців тому

    Beautiful explanation from a beautiful lady.

  • @user-gf3hh8fl7h
    @user-gf3hh8fl7h 3 роки тому

    thank you for making good video
    last answer mean x=+~~~?! ^^
    thank you teacher

  • @rakeshsrivastava1122
    @rakeshsrivastava1122 8 місяців тому

    One more solution x=0.75622.Comes from the -1 branch of Lambert W function.

  • @yabec4378
    @yabec4378 3 роки тому +6

    Wrong solution..6x=e^(2x) , x=-0.3... negatife solution.impossibble

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому

      Please watch my video ua-cam.com/video/nY7Y01oH0z8/v-deo.html. Here I explained that x must be ≥ −1/e. That means you can have a negative solution but it must be greater than or equal to −1/e.

    • @yabec4378
      @yabec4378 3 роки тому +1

      @@intellecta2686 i watched it..but that problem solution must be positive

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому +5

      Ooo that, you are right haha didn't even notice that mistake. Thank you for noticing. Have to pin it. I thought you mean it's not allowed to have negative solutions. But yeah, it is positive 👍

    • @spelunkerd
      @spelunkerd 2 роки тому

      @@intellecta2686 Yes, you should pin that reply. I skipped ahead and wondered why my sign was wrong. Not.

    • @Mathsca9
      @Mathsca9 10 місяців тому

      ​@@intellecta2686normally 2 solutions but you have the only 1

  • @sdal4926
    @sdal4926 3 роки тому +1

    It is almost impossible to see what you write on the board. Maybe it is because of the light and chalk you use.

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому +1

      True. First video with new lights + new chalk.

  • @romanpahuacho
    @romanpahuacho 3 місяці тому

    X=0.309 (positive)

  • @joseantoniomclauchlan2859
    @joseantoniomclauchlan2859 10 місяців тому

    X is positive

  • @anothervoice5495
    @anothervoice5495 3 роки тому +1

    Must have TWO solutions?

  • @rolandkaschek9722
    @rolandkaschek9722 9 місяців тому

    I find rather two solutions namely x approx 0.309 or x approx 0.756. Why did you get only one solution? Wolfram even seems to say, that for each integer n there is a solution as given by -0.5*W_n(-1/3). But you chose not to talk about those solutions as defined by the parameter n. Why is that?

  • @dharmendrapatel1659
    @dharmendrapatel1659 Рік тому

    Please solve the integration of sqrt of cosec(x)

  • @user-tt4ep6fr4d
    @user-tt4ep6fr4d 3 роки тому

    Thnk you for explanation
    But how can I calculate-1/2W(-1/3)

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 роки тому

      You can watch this video, I explained everything ua-cam.com/video/hu8oXMFDNQk/v-deo.html

  • @abdellahelassraoui373
    @abdellahelassraoui373 24 дні тому

    l,ecriture est invisible à cause de l,éclairage

  • @sanjasanja8893
    @sanjasanja8893 3 роки тому

    👍❤

  • @LearnWithFardin
    @LearnWithFardin Рік тому

    The Reflection from the board is distracting.

  • @GREAT.P
    @GREAT.P Рік тому

    Pls always make your chalky bold

  • @tj_1260
    @tj_1260 Рік тому

    ok

  • @epsilonxyzt
    @epsilonxyzt Рік тому

    Dear teacher! Please change your chalk. fade!

  • @tokajileo5928
    @tokajileo5928 3 місяці тому

    W is just an approximation like log. Nothing special about it. Now it is better if you use a computer numerically solving such equations, you do it at the end anyway by calculating W.

  • @user-mn9df8gh3z
    @user-mn9df8gh3z 11 місяців тому

    Your writing is not visible, because of the color of your chalk..

  • @ahmedelmarrikh7491
    @ahmedelmarrikh7491 Рік тому

    Je vous remercie beaucoup de tes leçons,je voudrais te dire que l'écriture n'apparaît pas bien merci

  • @alwalw3692
    @alwalw3692 Рік тому

    I did not understand ua-cam.com/video/whgoDbcSClY/v-deo.html
    why is it equal to x

  • @joseantoniomclauchlan2859
    @joseantoniomclauchlan2859 10 місяців тому

    What is your Name?