Natural Logarithm of Negative Numbers

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
5 replies · 23K views
prasannapakkiam
Well I came across this when someone asked me this question:

(-2)^n = 16

I can clearly see n=4. However, he did this:

ln((-2)^n) = ln(16)
n*ln(-2) = ln(16)
n*ln(2)+n*i*pi = ln(16)

How can I show that n=4 from this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's because n=4 isn't the only possible solution. Remember that log is a multivalued function (like arcsin) -- so introduce the necessary parametrisation, and see that it can be set to zero.
 
Log is a multivalued function since [tex]e^x[/tex] is a periodic function. Remember that Euler showed that

[tex]e^{ix} = \cos{x} + i\sin{x}[/tex] and hence we have that [tex]e^x = e^{x + 2\pi i n[/tex] and more general since [tex]a^x = e^{\ln{a} x}[/tex] it's true that [tex]a^x[/tex] is a periodic function.
 
Can someone please Exemplify? I get what they say; but I am still stuck...
 
prasannapakkiam said:
However, he did this:

ln((-2)^n) = ln(16)
n*ln(-2) = ln(16)
n*ln(2)+n*i*pi = ln(16)

How can I show that n=4 from this?

You can't, because your friend made a mistake. As written, n=4 is not a solution. He should have used

[tex]\begin{align*}<br /> \ln(-2) &= \text{Ln}(2) + (1 + 2k) \pi i \\<br /> \ln(16) &= \text{Ln}(16) + 2m\pi i<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

where [itex]\text{Ln}(x)[/itex] is the principal value of the natural logarithm and [itex]k[/itex] and [itex]m[/itex] are abitrary integers.

Applying the above to [itex]n\ln(-2) = \ln(16)[/itex] yields

[tex]n(\text{Ln}(2) + (1 + 2k) \pi i) = \text{Ln}(16) + 2m\pi i[/tex]

From this you should be able to show that n=4 is but one of infinitely many solutions and also that n=4 is the only pure real solution.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all your input. In the end I see that it is quite a simple problem. However, thanks for putting me on track...