[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiom-math] Simple question
From: |
Soren Hansen |
Subject: |
Re: [Axiom-math] Simple question |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Dec 2006 22:44:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 09:55:01PM +0100, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> >The problem I actually wanted to solve was:
> >solve((250/x)^x-6000000000,1.e-5)
> Sorry to say, but that is not a good problem description.
I suppose I could have been more precise. I just expected the context to
make up for my lack of detail. I wanted to solve (250/x)^x=6000000000 to
to a precision of 10^-5. In my other example I managed to do that by
giving solve an expression for which it found the values of x where the
expression evaluated to zero. I - naïvely - thought a similar approach
would be sensible.
> Try to formulate the problem without the "solve" function and specify
> clearly what solutions you accept. For example, there is no solution
> to
>
> (250/x)^x = 6000000000
>
> if you require x to be a natural number.
I was looking for an approximation with a set precision.
> You probably don't want that, but your problem description is too
> vague. If you leave the computer to guess something for you then you
> should prepare that a possible "answer" is not that what you expect.
> PS: Maple 9.5 says
>
> fsolve((250/x)^x-6000000000);
> 226.3269985
>
> If that is of any help.
Thanks, but I actually already found the answer using Maple. Maple's
version of solve gave me two solutions, each using LambertW. One
evaluated to ~226 and the other ~6.
I am merely trying to get the hang of Axiom in order to ditch Maple and
this seemed like a simple starting point.
--
Cheers, Søren Hansen.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [Axiom-math] Simple question, Ralf Hemmecke, 2006/12/04
- Re: [Axiom-math] Simple question,
Soren Hansen <=