MHB Change of bases with log tables

  • Thread starter Thread starter cbarker1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bases Change Log
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the logarithm of 825.6 to the base 3 using logarithm tables. The method involves applying the change of base formula, where $\log_{3}(825.6)$ is expressed as the ratio of $\log(825.6)$ to $\log(3)$. The user calculates $\log(825.6)$ as approximately 2.91677 and $\log(3)$ as 0.47712, leading to the computation of $\log_{3}(825.6)$. There is some confusion regarding whether to drop the last digit or interpolate when using the log tables for accuracy. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding logarithmic properties and the correct application of log tables for precise calculations.
cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
Hi everyone,

I need some help to solve this problem:

The direction states to find the value by using the log table

$\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)$

Work:

I using the change of base:
$\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)=\frac{\log\left({825.6}\right)}{\log\left({3}\right)}$

I look up the values of the logarithm of 3 and 825.6.

$\log\left({825.6}\right)=.91677+2$ =$\log\left({8.256}\right)+2$

$\log\left({3}\right)=.47712$

yields

$\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)=\frac{2.91677}{.47712}$

Taking the log of both sides:
$\log\left({\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)}\right)=\log\left({\frac{2.91677}{.47712}}\right)$

Using the log identity to dividing to difference:
$\log\left({\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)}\right)=\log\left({2.91677}\right)-\log\left({.47712}\right)$

Finding the values of log(2.91677) and log(.47712)

Do I drop the last digit in (2.91677 and .47712) and look up the first four digits or do I interpolate the last digits by using the Table of proportional parts?

Thank you,

Cbarker
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Sorry, I'm a bit confused. What exactly are you being asked to compute?
 
Compute the value by using log table
$\log_{3}\left({825.6}\right)$
 
I think I would observe:

$$825.6=\frac{2^6\cdot3\cdot43}{10}$$

And now apply some log properties, and then use the change of base as needed. :D
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top