Logarithm state the value of x for which the equation is defined

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation 3logx5 + 2logx2 - log1/x2 = 3, focusing on identifying the values of x for which the equation is defined. Participants explore the properties of logarithms and the conditions under which they are valid.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of logarithms and the conditions for their bases and arguments to be valid. Some suggest using the change of base formula to clarify the conditions for x. Others raise questions about the implications of x being less than or equal to 1 and its effect on the logarithmic functions involved.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations of the conditions for x being explored. Some participants have provided insights into the properties of logarithms, while others are still seeking clarification on how to state the values of x for which the equation is defined.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that logarithms are undefined for non-positive bases and that the base must be greater than zero and not equal to one. There is a focus on understanding the implications of these constraints in the context of the given equation.

  • #31
Jaco Viljoen said:
Hi Mark,
I thought so but when I checked, NO.
The rule states:
x>0 and not = to 1

Thank you for pointing that out.
Jaco
The base, b, must be positive, but can't be 1. ( I suppose Mark had a typo.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
HallsofIvy said:
This is the second time you have posted this and it still is NOT true. Where did you find that rule? For any base, b, b^0= 1 so log_b(1)= 0. That certainly is defined!

Hi Hallsoflvy,
I am not referring to logbx but to the problem where x is the base:
3logx5+2logx2-log1/x2=3

Sammy,
I understood what Mark was saying the base must be positive but can't be 1.
 
  • #33
I see that you liked what I posted in #28. Does that mean that you figured out how to use it to solve the problem? If so, please show us what you did.

Chet
 
  • #34
Chestermiller said:
I see that you liked what I posted in #28. Does that mean that you figured out how to use it to solve the problem? If so, please show us what you did.

Chet
Hi Chet,
I was thanking you for your interest and alternative option, I will however give it a bash:
what rule did you apply or why did you use ln?

$$\frac{\ln125}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln4}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln2}{\ln x}=3$$
$$\frac{\ln1000}{\ln x}=3$$
$$ln1000=3lnx$$
ln(x)3=ln1000
x3=1000
103=1000
so x=10I am not sure if I have done the right thing... Please advise
 
Last edited:
  • #35
Jaco Viljoen said:
Hi Chet,
I was thanking you for your interest and alternative option, I will however give it a bash:
what rule did you apply or why did you use ln?

$$\frac{\ln125}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln4}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln2}{\ln x}=3$$
$$\frac{125}{\ x}+\frac{4}{\ x}+\frac{2}{\ x}=3$$
$$\frac{125+4+2}{\ x}=3$$
$$\frac{131}{\ x}=3$$
$$131=3x$$
$$\frac{131}{\ 3}=x$$
$$x=43\frac{2}{\ 3}$$

I am not sure if I have done the right thing... Please advise
Well, your first equation is correct, but that's about all. Going from your first equation to your second equation is definitely not how logs work.

Did you notice that the three terms on the left hand side of your first equation have a common denominator. What do you usually do in an algebra problem or arithmetic problem when you have the sum of three separate terms, all of which have the same denominator?

Chet
 
  • #36
Jaco Viljoen said:
$$\frac{\ln125}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln4}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln2}{\ln x}=3$$
$$\frac{\ln1000}{\ln x}=3$$I am not sure if I have done the right thing... Please advise
Yeah, this is correct.
Do, some further solving.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaco Viljoen
  • #37
$$\frac{\ln125}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln4}{\ln x}+\frac{\ln2}{\ln x}=3$$
$$\frac{\ln1000}{\ln x}=3$$
$$ln1000=3lnx$$
ln(x)3=ln1000
x3=1000
103=1000
so x=10

Boom, done.

I don't think this change of base rule was covered in my manual.
Can this always be used?

Thank you
 
  • #38
SammyS said:
The base, b, must be positive, but can't be 1. ( I suppose Mark had a typo.)
That's what I meant, but was somehow unable to make my fingers follow the instructions from my brain. Thanks for pointing it out, Sammy! Embarassing, but I would rather see a mistake be corrected.

In my defense, the original equation had x as the base:
3logx5+2logx2-log1/x2=3
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaco Viljoen
  • #39
Jaco Viljoen said:
I don't think this change of base rule was covered in my manual.
Can this always be used?

Thank you
You could use that anytime.Of whether it is useful or not depends on the situation and your thinking.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaco Viljoen

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K