How does this simplify to give this answer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lo.Lee.Ta.
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simplify
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the simplification of a logarithmic expression involving the terms 2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1| and 2ln|1 + 0|. Participants are trying to understand how these terms simplify to 2ln|√(2) + 1|, particularly focusing on the cancellation of the factor 2 in the expression (2/√(2)).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants express confusion about the simplification process and the properties of logarithms. They question how the term (2/√(2)) simplifies to √(2) and discuss the implications of logarithmic properties on their calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into logarithmic properties, while others are still grappling with the implications of these properties on their specific problem. There is an acknowledgment of a misunderstanding regarding the simplification, and some clarification has been provided, but not all questions have been resolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There is a focus on understanding rather than providing direct solutions.

Lo.Lee.Ta.
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
1. I am on the very last step of this problem, but I don't see how this equation simplifies from
2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1| - 2ln|1 + 0| to 2ln|√(2) + 1|.2. I thought that since ln|1| = 0, then 2x0=0. And then the answer would be:
2ln|2/√(2) +1|.

I don't see how the 2 in the (2/√(2)) was canceled out to give just √(2)...

Would you please explain this to me?
Thank you very much! :D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lo.lee.ta. said:
1. I am on the very last step of this problem, but i don't see how this equation simplifies from
2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1| - 2ln|1 + 0| to 2ln|√(2) + 1|.2. I thought that since ln|1| = 0, then 2x0=0. And then the answer would be:
2ln|2/√(2) +1|.

I don't see how the 2 in the (2/√(2)) was canceled out to give just √(2)...

Would you please explain this to me?
Thank you very much! :d

2=(√2)*(√2). Or 2=2^1, √2=2^(1/2). (2^1)/(2^(1/2))=2^(1-1/2)=2^(1/2).
 
Last edited:
Lo.Lee.Ta. said:
1. I am on the very last step of this problem, but I don't see how this equation simplifies from
2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1| - 2ln|1 + 0| to 2ln|√(2) + 1|.

2. I thought that since ln|1| = 0, then 2x0=0. And then the answer would be:
2ln|2/√(2) +1|.

I don't see how the 2 in the (2/√(2)) was canceled out to give just √(2)...

Would you please explain this to me?
Thank you very much! :D
Comment #1: Those are not equations -- there are no equal signs.


To answer your primary question:

Use the following logarithm property.
[itex]\displaystyle C\cdot\ln(u)=\ln(u^C\,)[/itex]​
 
...I was debating using the word "equation," but then I didn't know what else to call it... :/
Thanks, though! :)
I didn't even know that was a property. Thanks! Will remember!

So then this:

[itex]\pi[/itex][2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1|) - [itex]\pi[/itex][2ln|1|]

Shoud become this:

[itex]\pi[/itex][ln|(2/√(2)) + 1|2] - 0


From the property: C*ln(u) = ln(uC), it seems that the entire [(2/√(2)) + 1] is the u...

But that does not seem to be correct because then that squared would be:

(4/√(2)) + 3...

So I guess only the (2/√(2)) is considered the u...?

But then that would equal ln|2 + 1| = ln|3|

I don't see how the √(2) remains.

Am I saying the u equals the wrong thing?
Please help.
Thank you so much! :)
 
Lo.Lee.Ta. said:
...I was debating using the word "equation," but then I didn't know what else to call it... :/
Thanks, though! :)
I didn't even know that was a property. Thanks! Will remember!

So then this:

[itex]\pi[/itex][2ln|(2/√(2)) + 1|) - [itex]\pi[/itex][2ln|1|]

Shoud become this:

[itex]\pi[/itex][ln|(2/√(2)) + 1|2] - 0


From the property: C*ln(u) = ln(uC), it seems that the entire [(2/√(2)) + 1] is the u...

But that does not seem to be correct because then that squared would be:

(4/√(2)) + 3...

So I guess only the (2/√(2)) is considered the u...?

But then that would equal ln|2 + 1| = ln|3|

I don't see how the √(2) remains.

Am I saying the u equals the wrong thing?
Please help.
Thank you so much! :)

If your question is why (2/√(2))=√(2), none of that has much to do with it. Did you miss my post?
 
Did you know that [itex]\displaystyle \ \ \frac{2}{\sqrt{2}} = \sqrt{2}\ ?[/itex]

Furthermore, [itex]\displaystyle \ (\sqrt{2}\,)^2=2\ .[/itex]
 
Oh, wow, you guys! XD

Yes, Dick, I did miss your post! When I was scrolling through, I seemed to only see SammyS's!

Wow, √(2)/2 = √(2)! Ugh, okay! ;)

I get it now! Thanks, Dick and SammyS! :D
simple mistake! :/
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K