Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a problem:

In the beginning there were 4. When time equaled 5, there were 20. How many would there be when time equaled 40?

To begin with, I really don't like this problem for its lack of units, making it very ambiguous. Also, what does this have to do with the exponential equation? It seems like a simple rate problem with an increase of $20-4$ every $5$ units of time.

By solving it like a rate problem I got the answer: $132$

But, by using the exponential equation my math textbook comes up with: $1,569,542$

$ A_t = A_0e^{kt} $

$ 20 = 4e^{k5} $

$ 5 = e^{5k} $

$ 1.61 = 5k $

$ 0.322 = k $

$ A_{40} = 4e^{0.322 \left(40\right)} $

$ A_{40} = 1,569,542 $

I am very confused as to the meaning of the problem.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

You have 2 points and you are trying to fit an equation to those two points. The answer you get depends on the equation you try and fit to those points. You've chosen a line, your book has chosen an exponential. Without a reason why you would prefer one equation over the other you and your book are both equally right.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for the help. I would say my book is wrong for assuming an exponential growth. – Web_Designer Mar 19 '13 at 23:35

Your reasoning is correct; you have to assume an exponential growth and calculations follow.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.