Units into Log and Exponential Functions

In summary, the conversation discusses the use of exponential and logarithmic functions in physical equations and how the argument of these functions must be dimensionless. It also mentions the Geiger-Nuttall law as an example where the argument of the logarithm can be made dimensionless. The concept of dimensionless arguments is important in accurately interpreting physical equations.
  • #1
terryphi
59
0
Hello,

Something I've wondered about for some time is what happens to units once we pump them into a exponential or log function.

For example in neutron attenuation

I(x) = I_0 * exp(-Sigma * x)

I feel like this something I should know, but I just don't get it.

I suspect what's happening is that the units stay the same since basically all the function is doing is changing the magnitude of the scalar quantity associated with the unit, and not necessarily what the unit measures.

If that's so is there a word I can use to describe a function that does change a inputs unit (such as the aformentioned) and one that does not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
terryphi said:
Hello,

Something I've wondered about for some time is what happens to units once we pump them into a exponential or log function.

For example in neutron attenuation

I(x) = I_0 * exp(-Sigma * x)

I feel like this something I should know, but I just don't get it.

I suspect what's happening is that the units stay the same since basically all the function is doing is changing the magnitude of the scalar quantity associated with the unit, and not necessarily what the unit measures.

If that's so is there a word I can use to describe a function that does change a inputs unit (such as the aformentioned) and one that does not?

This is a bit puzzling to understand.

If I've read it correctly, then you might have a problem understanding that the argument for the exponential above must be dimensionless. This means that whatever units x has, sigma must have the inverse of that unit.

The same with logarithm.

Zz.
 
  • #3
Sorry,

an exponential function can only take a dimensionless arguement?
 
  • #4
Yes.
 
  • #5
Sorry, I've never heard this, and I've used several equations which I'm relatively sure have had dimensional arguments.

Can you give some sort of explanation?
 
  • #6
In a physical quantity, magnitude and dimension are inseparable -- whatever function you have of its magnitude also applies to its dimension. Trivial example: Square area A = x2. If you know that [x] = m, you also know that [A] = m2, i.e. that area is measured in m2.

However, ex is problematic -- what, exactly, is the exponentiation of a dimension supposed to mean? To better see the problem, expand into a powerseries: f(x) = ex = 1 + x + x2/2! + x3/3! + ... If x now has dimension [dim], the first summand is dimensionless, the second of dimension [dim], the third of dimension [dim]2, and so on. So, what dimension is whatever quantity is denoted by f(x) supposed to have? There's no unique assignment possible. Only if x is dimensionless does one get a unique dimension for f(x) -- which is none, as well.
 
  • #7
S.Daedalus said:
To better see the problem, expand into a powerseries: f(x) = ex = 1 + x + x2/2! + x3/3! + ... If x now has dimension [dim], the first summand is dimensionless, the second of dimension [dim], the third of dimension [dim]2, and so on. So, what dimension is whatever quantity is denoted by f(x) supposed to have? There's no unique assignment possible. Only if x is dimensionless does one get a unique dimension for f(x) -- which is none, as well.

Note that this extends to other non-polynomial functions too, like the sine/cosine functions, and anything that can be made out of them (cosh,sinh,spherical harmonics, bessel functions, etc.).
 
  • #8
terryphi said:
Sorry, I've never heard this, and I've used several equations which I'm relatively sure have had dimensional arguments.

Can you give some sort of explanation?

What if you show us what equations you used, and I'm sure we can point out where you made your mistake of thinking they had a dimension.

Zz.
 
  • #9
terryphi said:
Sorry,

an exponential function can only take a dimensionless arguement?

I imagine you would find it hard to evaluate e(5 bannanas).
That's why an exponential must be dimensionless.
 
  • #10
ZapperZ said:
What if you show us what equations you used, and I'm sure we can point out where you made your mistake of thinking they had a dimension.

Zz.

Heh, I just realized you're right. Every function I can think of is dimensionless!

Thanks PF :D
 
  • #12
The Geiger-Nuttall is an empirical numerical formula, obtained basically from curve-fitting to data. The values of the coefficients depend on the specific units used for time and energy.

Note that you can re-cast it into a form in which the argument of the logarithm is dimensionless, by writing copies of the equation for isotopes 1 and 2 and subtracting one from the other:

[tex]\ln {\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1}} = -a_1 \left( \frac{Z_2}{\sqrt{E_2}}
- \frac{Z_1}{\sqrt{E_1}} \right)[/tex]

In this version the coefficient [itex]a_2[/itex] drops out. I don't have any appropriate textbooks to check here at home, but I suspect the derivation of the Geiger-Nuttall law by Gamow et al. produces something like what I wrote.
 
  • #13
I know of some examples where the question of dimensions is also not obvious namely physical chemistry where e.g. you can find definitions in textbooks like "the pH is the negative decadic logarithm of the concentration of hydronium ions".
However, in more careful texts you will see that what enters is always the quotient of the concentration (or activity to be more precise) and the concentration in some standard state, so that the argument of the logarithm is in fact dimensionless.
 
  • #14
Surely a quantity may have dimensions but a number can have none. Is there anything more to be said?
 
  • #15
So is that a good measure of a book? If they have logs with units?
 
  • #16
The book may have a lot of good and correct iknfo in it. It just didn't make it clear that the exponential was dimensionless.
 

1. What is a logarithm?

A logarithm is the inverse function of an exponential function. It is used to find the exponent needed to produce a certain value. In other words, it answers the question "To what power must I raise this number to get this result?"

2. How are logarithmic and exponential functions related?

Logarithmic and exponential functions are inverses of each other. This means that if you take the logarithm of a number, and then raise the result to the base of the logarithm, you will get back the original number. For example, log2(8) = 3, and 23 = 8.

3. What is the difference between a natural logarithm and a common logarithm?

A natural logarithm, denoted as ln(x), uses the base e (approximately equal to 2.71828). A common logarithm, denoted as log(x), uses the base 10. Both are used to solve exponential equations, but the base e is often preferred in mathematical and scientific calculations.

4. How are logarithms used in real life?

Logarithms have many practical applications in fields such as science, engineering, and finance. They are used to measure the intensity of earthquakes and sound, calculate pH levels, and model population growth. In finance, logarithms are used to calculate compound interest and to compare exponential growth rates.

5. How can I convert units into logarithms?

To convert units into logarithms, you can use the logarithm rules. For example, to convert from meters to decimeters, you can use the rule log10(x) = log10(10x) - 1. This means that to convert from meters to decimeters, you can take the logarithm of the number of meters and subtract 1 from the result.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
2
Views
934
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
769
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
505
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
484
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
974
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
6
Views
10K

Back
Top