Analyzing the inequality
I'm working through the inequality xex−alnx−ax−a≥0 for all x>0. Now, I need to find the range of a that satisfies this condition.
Identifying the inequality
I’m determining values for a such that xex−alnx−ax−a≥0 for all x>0.
Optimizing a
I’m optimizing a to ensure the inequality holds for all x>0. This involves finding the minimum value of lnx+x+1xex to determine the threshold for a.
Pinpointing constraints
I’m noting that for f(x) to remain non-negative for x>0, we need to find the minimal value of f(x) as a function of a.
Breaking down the problem
I’m setting f(x)≥0 and factoring out a in the expression. This leads me to explore the relationship between a, x, and lnx+x+1.
Assessing the behavior
I’m noticing how lnx changes sign as x crosses zero, and how lnx+x+1 varies around x=0, x=1, and as x approaches infinity.
Crafting the approach
I'm thinking through how to find the minimal value of f(x) by deriving f′(x) and pinpointing the critical points.
Breaking down f(x) into derivatives
I’m piecing together f(x) by splitting each term. Simplifying derivatives, I end up with f′(x)=ex(x+1)−xa−a, though it's a bit tricky to manage.
Identifying function behavior
OK, let me see. As x approaches 0 from the right, f(x) heads to infinity due to −alnx's dominance.
Tracing the critical points
I'm piecing together the critical points of f(x) by setting f′(x)=0 to pinpoint where a minimum might logically occur.
Isolating a and finding critical points
I’m working through ex(x+1)=a(x1+1) and finding that a=exx at critical points.
Determining critical points
OK, I’m noting that for x>0, the derivative f′(x) equals zero at a=exx. This leads to the critical points.
Substituting and simplifying
OK, let me see. I've substituted a=xex into f(x), but the simplification seems a bit off. I’m working through the expression to clarify it.
Breaking down the equation
I’m noting that a=xex and simplifying f(x) by substituting and combining terms. This highlights the algebraic progression, leading to a more concise form.
Breaking down the function
I started with expressions for a and alnx, simplified them to f(x), and reduced it to −xex(lnx+x).
Breaking down the function
I’m working out the function f(x)=−xex(lnx+x) and rearranging it as g(x)=lnx+x. Next, I’ll figure out its critical points.
Working through the steps
I’m calculating g′(x) for g(x)=lnx+x. It’s positive for x>0, so g(x) is increasing in that range.
Solving a transcendental equation
I'm working on finding x for lnx+x=0. This involves potentially iterative methods or specialized techniques due to its transcendental nature.
Determining critical points
I calculated the values of g(x) at different points and found that x≈0.5671 is the solution of lnx+x=0, where g(x) changes sign.
Evaluating minimal value
I discovered that f(x)=−xex(lnx+x) can be negative when x>0.5671. This indicates that f(x) might not always be non-negative, prompting a reassessment of the initial assumption.
Evaluating zero crossing
I determined that g(x) crosses zero at x≈0.5671 by calculating g(x) at x=e−1 and x=1.
Calculating f(x) value
I computed f(1) and found it to be negative, specifically −e≈−2.71828.
Determining behavior
I'm mapping out the behavior of f(x) around x=0.5671, noting it decreases from +∞ to −e before becoming negative.
Finding the threshold
I’m looking to determine the smallest possible value a that ensures f(x)≥0 for all x>0, given that f(x) sometimes turns negative for certain x.
Testing specific values
I’m examining the inequality for a≤0. With a=0, f(x)≥0 for x>0. For a<0, f(x) can be negative due to the lnx term.
Evaluating non-negativity
Initially, I’m working through if a≤0 ensures f(x)≥0 for all x>0, as the terms are non-negative with −a≥0.
Investigating function behavior
I’m analyzing the constraints on a in the function f(x) to ensure −a(lnx+x+1)≥0. This leads me to conclude that a≤0 is necessary for non-negativity.
Breaking down the equation
I’m examining the term −a(lnx+x+1)≤0 to find the range of a. This involves locating the minimal value of f(x).