Plotting the third point ?

[lvl107]

Hello Everyone.

From :

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+(x-(1%2F2)*pi)*(x-(3%2F2)*pi)*(x-(5%2F2)*pi)%2B%7Be%5E(x)-1%2F((e%5E(x*i))%5Ei)%7D*e%5E(-2*pi)%3D0

Is there a way to plot the third point ?

Regards.

Loi.

[Werner_E]

Sorry, but I give up - explaining the very same over an over again!

Maybe someone else has more luck

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[lvl107]

Werner, I very sorry about my question. My question would be : "Is there a way to plot the third root-point  ?"

Best Regards.

[Werner_E]

---

@lvl107 wrote:

Werner, I very sorry about my question. My question would be : "Is there a way to plot the third root-point  ?"

---

Sure!

Or you may consider Freds suggestion.

[Fred_Kohlhepp · Accepted solution]

As Werner shows, there is an imaginary component to the second point (that is small enough that it apparently doesn't show in your version.)  The solution would be to specify only the real portions {Re(g(x))}. 

[lvl107]

Yes, yes... I guess so. Many many thanks, Fred.. The point doesn't show in my Mathcad15 (version).

Many thanks again, Fred.

Best Regards.

Loi.

[Werner_E]

---

@lvl107 wrote:

The point doesn't show in my Mathcad15 (version).

---

I bet it does if you do the same as I did. Look at how I modified the definition of pts.

Some day even you will realize that Mathcad simply can't handle a family of functions defined like g(x) as we would like it to do and you can't expect that just one single k in f(k,x) can equal what Mathcad does with g(x).

You have a different k for every interval of length 2 pi!

One last try:

[lvl107]

Now I'm sure that you're right : "My Mathcad15 doesn't show third root-point":

 

[lvl107]

By the way : " a 'full' key word make some other help with 'fully' does ?" :

[lvl107]

Fred, could you please give me a sreenshot of that of other version ?

Best Regards.

Loi.

[Fred_Kohlhepp]

As I have said elsewhere, I no longer have version 15, only Prime 4.0 express.  So when I type (Re(g(x)), please consider it a suggestion to type it yourself, somewhere where you have already defined g(x).