# 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: **92 times**

Last updated: **Feb 15**

AttributeError: 'dict' object has no attribute 'solve'

Not understandable error when solving polynomial equation

Sage says equation isn't true while Mathematica says it is

Solve system of equations with additional conditions in sage

solve an equation in terms of an expression?

Is there a way to solve a differential equation in sage with adaptive step size?

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.