Application of the Lambert W Function (Part 2)

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 82

  • @intellecta2686
    @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว +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 🙂

  • @ivancollaomarin9466
    @ivancollaomarin9466 27 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Excelente profesora, se agradece por entregar sus conocimientos......

  • @BalazsBosze1
    @BalazsBosze1 ปีที่แล้ว +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 TH-cam made easier commenting math functions... 🙂

    • @JoseVieira-hs9qo
      @JoseVieira-hs9qo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +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 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      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 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    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

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thank you David, it really means a lot.

  • @mathsplus01
    @mathsplus01 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

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

  • @mtc-j9i
    @mtc-j9i 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

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

  • @akihuanakamori2578
    @akihuanakamori2578 ปีที่แล้ว +3

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

    • @gregorymirsky8707
      @gregorymirsky8707 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

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

    • @JoseVieira-hs9qo
      @JoseVieira-hs9qo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

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

  • @rajneeshsingh5304
    @rajneeshsingh5304 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thank you, I appreciate it 🙏

    • @rajneeshsingh5304
      @rajneeshsingh5304 3 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @johnwindisch1956
    @johnwindisch1956 2 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @nooruddinbaqual7869
    @nooruddinbaqual7869 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How is Wolfram Alpha used?

  • @maxivides
    @maxivides ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @coshy2748
    @coshy2748 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Your introduction presentation is good. One improvement regarding your board is to have chalk marks clearly displayed. One of the chalk (white ?) Is faint, i.e. hard to read. The other chalk (yellow ?) is bold and easily read.

  • @incomestockinvesting5626
    @incomestockinvesting5626 4 ปีที่แล้ว +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  4 ปีที่แล้ว +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 :)

  • @salvatorecosta875
    @salvatorecosta875 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +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

  • @anothervoice5495
    @anothervoice5495 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Very clear presentation.

  • @marcelgranda1341
    @marcelgranda1341 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Excelente. Explicas muy bien.

  • @Hjominbonrun
    @Hjominbonrun 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    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?

  • @MathForEverybody
    @MathForEverybody 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you!

  • @savasalpdo
    @savasalpdo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    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.

  • @tsurcurlyhair
    @tsurcurlyhair 2 ปีที่แล้ว +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 2 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @purim_sakamoto
    @purim_sakamoto 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    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

  • @emilianorosario5935
    @emilianorosario5935 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @romanpahuacho
    @romanpahuacho 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks a lot.

  • @guidoreuter6032
    @guidoreuter6032 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

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

  • @stefanotonon5265
    @stefanotonon5265 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Ottimo video!

  • @fouadkobeissi4537
    @fouadkobeissi4537 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Please use good chalk on the board

  • @SuperDeadparrot
    @SuperDeadparrot 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    In Wolfram Alpha: solve -2x = productlog( -1/3 ) for x

  • @rmw6151
    @rmw6151 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    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  4 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @doltifantara
    @doltifantara 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

  • @sdal4926
    @sdal4926 3 ปีที่แล้ว +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 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      True. First video with new lights + new chalk.

  • @dharmendrapatel1659
    @dharmendrapatel1659 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Please solve the integration of sqrt of cosec(x)

  • @yabec4378
    @yabec4378 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

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

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Please watch my video th-cam.com/video/nY7Y01oH0z8/w-d-xo.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 ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว +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 ปีที่แล้ว

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

    • @Mathsca9
      @Mathsca9 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @edgareduardomatamorosizagu7291
    @edgareduardomatamorosizagu7291 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks

  • @anothervoice5495
    @anothervoice5495 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Must have TWO solutions?

  • @naayou99
    @naayou99 ปีที่แล้ว

    Beautiful explanation from a beautiful lady.

  • @طارقالحريري-ت6د
    @طارقالحريري-ت6د 3 ปีที่แล้ว

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

    • @intellecta2686
      @intellecta2686  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      You can watch this video, I explained everything th-cam.com/video/hu8oXMFDNQk/w-d-xo.html

  • @pavelsolaris1901
    @pavelsolaris1901 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    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

  • @pedgmarq
    @pedgmarq 3 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @dunabogdany
    @dunabogdany 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

    • @disgracedmilo
      @disgracedmilo ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

  • @leonardonabinger
    @leonardonabinger 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

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

  • @rolandkaschek9722
    @rolandkaschek9722 ปีที่แล้ว

    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?

  • @LearnWithFardin
    @LearnWithFardin ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The Reflection from the board is distracting.

  • @제임스주니어
    @제임스주니어 3 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @romanpahuacho
    @romanpahuacho 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    X=0.309 (positive)

  • @joseantoniomclauchlan2859
    @joseantoniomclauchlan2859 ปีที่แล้ว

    X is positive

  • @alwalw3692
    @alwalw3692 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I did not understand th-cam.com/video/whgoDbcSClY/w-d-xo.html
    why is it equal to x

  • @HashemMozaffari
    @HashemMozaffari ปีที่แล้ว +1

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

  • @sanjasanja8893
    @sanjasanja8893 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    👍❤

  • @rakeshsrivastava1122
    @rakeshsrivastava1122 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @joseantoniomclauchlan2859
    @joseantoniomclauchlan2859 ปีที่แล้ว

    What is your Name?

  • @abdellahelassraoui373
    @abdellahelassraoui373 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    l,ecriture est invisible à cause de l,éclairage

  • @GREAT.P
    @GREAT.P ปีที่แล้ว

    Pls always make your chalky bold

  • @ahmedelmarrikh7491
    @ahmedelmarrikh7491 2 ปีที่แล้ว

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

  • @tj_1260
    @tj_1260 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    ok

  • @jovanstojcevski3334
    @jovanstojcevski3334 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Although very interesting it is impossible to read your text. Can you use a white board with black marker.

  • @epsilonxyzt
    @epsilonxyzt ปีที่แล้ว

    Dear teacher! Please change your chalk. fade!

  • @donlowell
    @donlowell 5 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Funny how no one wants to graph to verify. Graphing y = 6x and graphing y = e^2x you can see there are 2 real solutions.

  • @tokajileo5928
    @tokajileo5928 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    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.