Question about formula for natural log

Matt Benesi
Messages
134
Reaction score
7
Any information on the following formula for natural logarithm (I looked in wikipedia and Mathworld but didn't see it). It came from another equation I was working on a bit ago, and I was curious about it as I didn't recall seeing it before (which doesn't mean I haven't), although it reminded me of some equations for e.

\ln{x} =\lim_{n\to\infty} \left[ \left (1- \frac{1}{x^{\frac{1}{n}}} \right) \times n \right ]
For better visibility (bottom of the fraction is the nth root of x):
\ln{x} =\lim_{n\to\infty} \left[ \left (1- \frac{1}{ \sqrt[n]{x}} \right) \times n \right ]

Or yet another form:

\ln{x} =\lim_{n\to\infty} \left[ \left (1- x^{- \frac{1}{n}} \right) \times n \right ]
And I might have answered my own question with this last one... sheesh... anyways, still would like to read about it.
\ln{x} =\lim_{n\to\infty} \left[n- n\times x^{- \frac{1}{n}} \right ]

Makes the derivative readily apparent, ehh? :D
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It follows from
e^x =\lim_{n\to\infty} \left (1+\frac{x}{n}\right)^n
 
Thanks, I realized that post-post, right after I reformulated it a last time and powered down the computer. Ended up writing it out on paper and deriving this particular formula for e^x:

x = \lim_{n\to\infty} \left(1- \frac{\ln{x}}{n} \right )^{-n}
which is basically the following reformulated~~~
e^x = \lim_{n\to\infty} \left(1- \frac{x}{n} \right )^{-n}
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top