Active forum topics
- Hydraulics: Rotating Vessel
- Inverse Trigo
- General Solution of y′=xlnx
- engineering economics: construct the cash flow diagram
- Eliminate the Arbitrary Constants
- Law of cosines
- Maxima and minima (trapezoidal gutter)
- Special products and factoring
- Integration of 4x^2/csc^3x√sinxcosx dx
- application of minima and maxima
New forum topics
Recent comments
- Determine the least depth…1 week 4 days ago
- Solve mo ang h manually…3 weeks 1 day ago
- Paano kinuha yung height na…3 weeks 1 day ago
- It's the unit conversion…1 month ago
- Refer to the figure below…4 weeks ago
- Yes.4 months 3 weeks ago
- Sir what if we want to find…4 months 3 weeks ago
- Hello po! Question lang po…5 months 1 week ago
- 400000=120[14π(D2−10000)]
(…6 months 1 week ago - Use integration by parts for…7 months 1 week ago
Dividing both sides by 6x,
Dividing both sides by 6x, you get
4x/6x+1=9x/6x
Simplifying the fractions you get
2x/3x+1=3x/2x
That can be written as
(2/3)x+1=(3/2)x
Now, if the number you want is (2/3)x=k, then (3/2)x=1/k ,
which means the equation can be written as
k+1=1/k
Multiplying both sides times k,
k2+k=1
Solving that quadratic equation gives you two real solutions for k.
There is something misleading
In reply to Dividing both sides by 6x, by KMST
There is something misleading hahaha.
Do the two real solutions for k BOTH give REAL solutions for x ?
I am not used anymore to
I am not used anymore to calculate this type of equation, the result of relying too much in
SHIFT + SOLVE
of Casio. I did not say doingShift + Solve
is bad, it is actually highly recommended in my line of work, hehehe. Anyway, allow me to solve this, and I am actually surprised that solving for x is more complex than solving for (2/3)x. Here is my take based on the suggestion of KMST.4x+6x=9x
4x6x+6x6x=9x6x
(46)x+1=(96)x
(23)x+1=(32)x
(23)x+1=1(23)x
(23)2x+(23)x=1
(23)2x+(23)x−1=0
By Quadratic Equation
(23)x=−1±√12−4(1)(−1)2(1)
(23)x=−1±√52
(23)x=−1+√52
log(23)x=log−1+√52
xlog(23)=log(√5−1)−log2
x(log2−log3)=log(√5−1)−log2
x=log(√5−1)−log2log2−log3 ← a real number
For
(23)x=−1−√52
log(23)x=log−1−√52
xlog(23)=log(−√5−1)−log2
x(log2−log3)=log(−√5−1)−log2
x=log(−√5−1)−log2log2−log3 ← underfined
Hence,
(23)x=√5−12 ← this is my answer.
Please be gentle with me, hehehe. Although I hope I was able to consider everyhting, maybe I miss simething. As I've said, I am no longer used to this type of approach. A decimal number from calculator is more than acceptable for me.