Log laws (possible error in answers)

  • Thread starter Thread starter franky2727
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Laws Log
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around a potential error in integrating the expression integral[(2/(2-z))+(2/(1+2z))]dz and equating it to integral dv/v. The user expresses confusion over the logarithmic manipulation, particularly regarding the appearance of the -2 factor in the logarithmic equation ln|v|=-2ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|+c. Participants clarify that the logarithmic laws are not the issue, suggesting that the user may have made mistakes in the integration process itself. They recommend using substitution methods for the integrals to resolve the confusion. The thread emphasizes the importance of correctly applying integration techniques to avoid errors in logarithmic expressions.
franky2727
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
ive got integral[(2/(2-z))+(2/(1+2z))]dz=integral dv/v

then the next line is ln|v|=-2ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|+c

when i equate this i get rid of the 2 as a common factor integrate the V side first and multiply through by 1/2 giving me ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|=1/2ln|v| which i don't think is the same as what my answer shows me can someone point out where I am going wrong please
 
Physics news on Phys.org
franky2727 said:
ive got integral[(2/(2-z))+(2/(1+2z))]dz=integral dv/v

then the next line is ln|v|=-2ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|+c

when i equate this i get rid of the 2 as a common factor integrate the V side first and multiply through by 1/2 giving me ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|=1/2ln|v| which i don't think is the same as what my answer shows me can someone point out where I am going wrong please

Hi franky2727! :smile:

i] multiplying through by 1/2 gives you ln|2-z|+ 1/2ln|1+2z|=1/2ln|v|

ii] don't do that!

as soon as you get a log equation like ln|v|=-2ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|+c,

just un-log it (ie do e-to-the to both sides :wink:),

and you get … ? :smile:
 
sorry I am more confused as to where the -2 has came from in there answer i thought i would get ln|v| = 2ln|2-z|+2ln|1+2z| +c or am i making serious mistakes with my log laws?
 
franky2727 said:
sorry I am more confused as to where the -2 has came from in there answer i thought i would get ln|v| = 2ln|2-z|+2ln|1+2z| +c or am i making serious mistakes with my log laws?

Your ln|v|=-2ln|2-z|+ln|1+2z|+c is correct.

Next step:

eln|v| = … ? :smile:
 
franky2727 said:
sorry I am more confused as to where the -2 has came from in there answer i thought i would get ln|v| = 2ln|2-z|+2ln|1+2z| +c or am i making serious mistakes with my log laws?

It's not the log laws that are the problem. If you are getting that, then you are integrating wrong. To integrate \int dz/(1-z) let u= 1- z and to integrate \int dz/(1+2z) let u= 1+ 2z. What is du in each case?
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K