Next: 5. A comparison of
Up: Root finders for equations
Previous: 3. Regula Falsi
The methods we saw so far, the Bisection Method
and Regula Falsi, both had the same principle
in common: they both started with an interval which was then
improved in each iteration. Newton's Method, however, works
different. First, we now suppose that our function f is not just
continuous, but also differentiable. Then we begin with a starting
point, not an interval. Let's call this point
. We know
calculate
and
, and think to ourselves: ``OK, we know that
the graph of
is not a straight line, but suppose it was. Then we could
find the root by drawing a straight line through the point
with slope
, and calculating the place where this line intersects
the x-axis.'' So, just like Regula Falsi, we hope
that our function
is more or less a straight line, so that we can get
a good approximation by using the root of the tangent line in
. Of course, we can do this several times, which leads
to the formula:
Let's put Newton to the test. Here is the applet "Newton", that
shows the method:
If you tried Newton a few times for some , you might have noticed that
it is much faster than the other methods we encountered so far. Indeed,
Newton's Method generally produces accurate results within a few
iterations. To see this, suppose the real root of
lies in the point
, and we started with an approximation
. Then we find, using
the Taylor series:
So for our next approximation x1, we have:
So, our first approximation
had an error
, but our second
iteration only has an error of
. So if we started with an
approximation that had 3 significant digits, we have, after just one
iteration, an approximation with 6 significant digits!
You can see this
behaviour by looking at the table of numbers generated by the applet on
the Java Console.
Compare this with the Bisection Method, which only
doubles the precision each iteration. So Bisection needs at least 3
iterations to get one more significant digit!
Next: 5. A comparison of
Up: Root finders for equations
Previous: 3. Regula Falsi
Stephan Houben
2000-03-18