Timeline for High-Precision NSolve
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 15:54 | vote | accept | arax | ||
| Oct 29, 2014 at 15:14 | answer | added | george2079 | timeline score: 5 | |
| Oct 29, 2014 at 14:22 | answer | added | Bob Hanlon | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 29, 2014 at 13:23 | answer | added | Michael E2 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Oct 29, 2014 at 11:35 | comment | added | Stephen Luttrell |
You can solve this one symbolically using Solve[f1[x] == f2[x], x], which gives the output {{x -> -2 ProductLog[-((e^2 k \[Alpha] Sqrt[(Zl \[Rho])/(e^2 k \[Alpha])])/(2 Zl \[Rho]))]}, {x -> -2 ProductLog[(e^2 k \[Alpha] Sqrt[(Zl \[Rho])/(e^2 k \[Alpha])])/(2 Zl \[Rho])]}}, though there is also a warning message "Inverse functions are being used ...".
|
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 11:19 | comment | added | arax |
@b.gatessucks Didn't work. I think that Mathematica tried to simplify the expression and the Log was eliminated.
|
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 11:17 | comment | added | arax |
@celtschk Your code gave the same warning, but the result reached the desired precision. P.S. Both your code and mine need to specify the domain Reals, or it will give the result of {{}} as you pointed out. Weird!
|
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 11:13 | history | edited | Öskå | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Greek only
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 10:51 | comment | added | celtschk |
Does NSolve[SetPrecision[f1[x]==f2[x], 100], x, WorkingPrecision->100] work? (On 8.0.0.0, your version gives no warning and a result of {{}}, so I can't check myself).
|
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 10:19 | history | edited | arax | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 18 characters in body
|
| Oct 29, 2014 at 10:10 | history | asked | arax | CC BY-SA 3.0 |