MHB Is This Use of Logarithmic Rules Correct in Solving for x?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeusAbscondus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Log Rules
DeusAbscondus
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
Would some kind soul please look over the following and check that use of the log rules, thought roundabout, is nonetheless correct?
(thx kindly: I'm revising stuff I tried to cram last year)

The set question:

Solve for x:

$$y=ln(x)+1$$

Answer given in text:
$$y-1=ln(x)$$
$$\therefore \text {by definition}\ x=e^{y-1}$$

$\text{My attempt, using log laws: }$
$$y=ln(x)+1$$
$$\Rightarrow y=ln(x)+ln(e)$$
$$\Rightarrow y=ln(ex)$$
$$\therefore \text{ by definition} \ e^{y}=ex $$
$$\Rightarrow x=\frac{e^y}{e}$$
$$\therefore x=e^{y-1}$$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Re: basic question regarding log rules

Both methods look spot on to me! :D
 
Re: basic question regarding log rules

MarkFL said:
Both methods look spot on to me! :D

Thanks kindly Mark.
I like the new look in the new photo: real fun party-guy!(Rofl)
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top