MHB Finding the log by using the proportional table

AI Thread Summary
To find the logarithm of 29517, the discussion utilizes a proportional table. By referencing row 295, the value 46997 is identified, and an additional value of 11.2 is added based on the second table for the last digit. This results in a total of 47008.2, which is interpreted as 0.470082 when decimal points are considered. The final logarithm value is calculated as 4.470082, with a minor discrepancy noted when compared to a calculator's output.
cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
Logarithms​
[TABLE="class: outer_border, width: 500, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD]N[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]293[/TD]
[TD]46687[/TD]
[TD]46702[/TD]
[TD]46716[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]294[/TD]
[TD]46850[/TD]
[TD]46835[/TD]
[TD]46864[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]295[/TD]
[TD]46982[/TD]
[TD]46997[/TD]
[TD]47012[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Prop. Pts​

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]3.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]4.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]6.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]8.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]9.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]11.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]12.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]14.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Find the value of $\log\left({29517}\right)$
Work:
4+$\log\left({2.9517}\right)$

Thanks for your help
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Cbarker1 said:
Logarithms​
[TABLE="class: outer_border, width: 500, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD]N[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]293[/TD]
[TD]46687[/TD]
[TD]46702[/TD]
[TD]46716[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]294[/TD]
[TD]46850[/TD]
[TD]46835[/TD]
[TD]46864[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]295[/TD]
[TD]46982[/TD]
[TD]46997[/TD]
[TD]47012[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Prop. Pts​

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]3.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]4.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]6.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]8.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]9.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]11.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]12.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]14.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Find the value of $\log\left({29517}\right)$
Work:
4+$\log\left({2.9517}\right)$

Thanks for your help

Hi Cbarker1,

To find $\log(2.9517)$, we look up row $295$ in the table.
Then we pick the column with 1, where we find $46997$.
For the last digit we consult the 2nd table, where entry $7$ has $11.2$, which we add for a total of $47008.2$.

In the table the decimal points have been left out, which means we need to read this as $0.470082$.
Add the $4$ you found for a total of $4.470082$.

My calculator says $4.470072$.
Presumably the small discrepancy is an approximation error due to the use of the second table.
 

Thread 'Trigonometry problem of interest'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'

Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'

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...
View full post »

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top