How Does the Logarithmic Equation Simplify with Large Frequency Values?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rectifier
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logarithms
Rectifier
Gold Member
Messages
313
Reaction score
4
Hey!
I have a question regarding a statement in my physics book. I don't see how
|H(f)|_{dB} = - 10log (1+( \frac{f}{f_B})^2)

approaches this equation below for big values on f.

|H(f)|_{dB} = - 20log ( \frac{f}{f_B})

Could you please help me out?

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I am sorry if this is posted to a wrong sub-forum.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
When f is large, you can ignore 1 and so there only remains -10 \log{(\frac{f}{f_B})^2}. Now you can use the property \log a^n=n\log a to get what you want.
 
  • Like
Likes Rectifier
Shyan said:
When f is large, you can ignore 1 and so there only remains -10 \log{(\frac{f}{f_B})^2}. Now you can use the property \log a^n=n\log a to get what you want.
Oh gosh. Thank you for your help :)
 
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