3sqrt(x)=2^x
I'm asked to find the intersection points between these two functions. is this even possible with algebra?
hint: answer is within (0, 100)
>>7929893
9=X^3
The answer is the cube root of nine,
and nine to the two thirds for y.
>>7929904
that's not even close to correct
how did you even come up with such a wrong answer?
You can't find the exact solutions using elementary functions.
Maybe they wanted a numerical approximation?
>>7929893
x = (1/9)4^x
x = (1/9)4^((1/9)4^x) = (1/9)(4^(1/9))^(4^x))
So we can see this gives a power tower which can only be solved using the Lambert W-function with z = 2^(2/9)
>>7929893
X=2.08
>>7931592
Dumb fucking assfag. Can you even read? It is 2^x not x^2 on the right hand side. Your answer is fucking wrong.
>>7931618
>>7931592
fluffing rekt son
>>7929893
[math] 9x = 4x^2 \implies x = 9/4 [/math]
>>7931644
Nice use of [Wolfram?]. Prefect answer.
>>7929893
>3sqrt(x)=2^x
Maybe make it 3*2^(log2 (rad(x)) ) = 2^x
3 = 2^(x-log2(rad(x))
Ln(3)/ln(2)=x-ln(rad (x))/ln(2)
Ln(3)=ln (2)*x-ln(rad(x))
This was supposed to lead somewhere. ...
[math]9x=4^x[/math]
I guess numerical methods suit this task.
Fuck you guys are retarded. Look up Lambert W function.
>>7931831
"""""""""Function""""""""
>>7931927
"""""""""""autism""""""""""""
>>7931631
2^X =/=X^2
>>7929893
Advice: If you doubt that an equation has an algebraic solution, just put it into wolfram, and if it can't produce a closed-form answer, the odds are that it's actually not possible.
>>7931826
This
Try the Newton rhapson method. Is a numerical one but still can be made with paper and pencil in a reasonable time
