# exponential equation solve problem

```
b=4*3^(2*x-1)==5*4^(x+2)
show(b)
solve(b,x)
```

The Solution is:

```
[4^(x + 2) == 4/5*3^(2*x - 1)]
```

Should the solve alg. solve for x?

exponential equation solve problem

```
b=4*3^(2*x-1)==5*4^(x+2)
show(b)
solve(b,x)
```

The Solution is:

```
[4^(x + 2) == 4/5*3^(2*x - 1)]
```

Should the solve alg. solve for x?

add a comment

2

Well...

```
sage: b.solve(x)[0].log().log_expand().solve(x)
[x == 1/2*(log(3) + 4*log(2) - log(4/5))/(log(3) - log(2))]
```

`<Swing>`

"Who could ask for anything more ?"`</Swing>`

Maybe looking for *other* solutions ? (Hint, hint...)

**EDIT :** Further hint : the logarithm is a "multivalued function" in the complex field (i. e. not a function strictly speaking). Any time you take a log, you introduce further, possibly spurious, solutions...

**EDIT 2:** Full solution, since no one seemed to see the problem :

Original problem:

```
,----
| b=4*3^(2*x-1)==5*4^(x+2)
`----
```

if the members of this equations are equal, so do their logs. So we might try to solve :

```
,----
| Lb=b.log().expand_log()
| Lb
`----
(2*x - 1)*log(3) + 2*log(2) == 2*(x + 2)*log(2) + log(5)
```

But the converse *is not true !*. More specifically :

```
,----
| z, z_1, z_2=var("z, z_1, z_2", domain="integer")
| (e^(x+2*I*pi*z)).maxima_methods().exponentialize()
`----
e^x
```

Therefore, we have to consider the solutions of :

```
,----
| Lb2=(Lb.lhs()+2*I*pi*z_1==Lb.rhs()+2*I*pi*z_2)
| Lb2
`----
2*I*pi*z_1 + (2*x - 1)*log(3) + 2*log(2) == 2*I*pi*z_2 + 2*(x + 2)*log(2) + log(5)
```

for any integer values of `z_1`

and `z_2`

. The solutions are :

```
,----
| Sol=Lb2.solve(x, to_poly_solve=True)
| Sol
`----
[x == 1/2*(-2*I*pi*z_1 + 2*I*pi*z_2 + log(5) + log(3) + 2*log(2))/(log(3) - log(2))]
```

i. e. $$\left[x = \frac{-2 i \pi z_{1} + 2 i \pi z_{2} + \log\left(5\right) + \log\left(3\right) + 2 \log\left(2\right)}{2 {\left(\log\left(3\right) - \log\left(2\right)\right)}}\right]$$

which is unique for any difference $z=z_1-z_2$.

Checking these solutions is not as direct as one could wish. But one can check that the ratio of the two members is one :

```
,----
| (b.rhs()/b.lhs()).subs(Sol).log().log_expand().expand().factor().exp()
`----
1
```

One can note that the non-real roots of this equation are somehow missed
by Sage (and Maxima). This is also true for `giac`

and `sympy`

. But
Mathematica returns them:

```
,----
| mathematica.Reduce(b,x)
`----
Element[C[1], Integers] && x == -((2*I)*Pi*C[1] + 2*Log[2] + Log[3] + Log[5])/ (2*(Log[2] - Log[3]))
```

i. e. $$c_1\in \mathbb{Z}\land x=-\frac{2 i \pi c_1+\log (5)+\log (3)+2 \log (2)}{2 (\log (2)-\log (3))}$$

HTH,

Asked: **
2019-02-13 08:20:11 -0500
**

Seen: **78 times**

Last updated: **Feb 15**

Extended Euclid with polynomials

Solve system of equations with additional conditions in sage

How to get all (numerical) solutions of an equation?

Not understandable error when solving polynomial equation

How to make solve to use certain variables on the right side

Method for solving a large system of under-determined equations?

Newton method for one variable

Copyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.