Natural Logarithms: Are They Equal to Other Logarithms?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter funlord
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logarithm Natural
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equality of natural logarithms and other logarithmic notations, particularly focusing on the interpretation of different logarithmic expressions and their notations. Participants explore the implications of using various notations and whether they convey the same mathematical meaning.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that both notations represent the fourth power of the natural logarithm of (x+3), suggesting they are equal.
  • Others argue against the validity of certain logarithmic notations, stating that the use of ln is decisive and that alternative notations may lead to confusion.
  • A participant mentions using a website to check the equality, arriving at a result of 0, and questions if this indicates equality.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the authority of online tools, yet agrees with the assertion that the two notations describe the same mathematical concept.
  • There is a discussion about the rarity of certain logarithmic notations, with some participants noting that they have not encountered specific forms in over 55 years.
  • Participants clarify their interpretations of logarithmic expressions, particularly regarding implied bases and the commonality of certain notations in different contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the equality of the logarithmic expressions. There are multiple competing views regarding the validity and interpretation of different logarithmic notations.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about logarithmic notation and the context in which different bases are implied. The discussion also reflects a dependence on personal experiences with notation usage over time.

funlord
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
upload_2015-8-31_15-9-38.png

are they equal?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The first is hard to recognize, but I would take them both as the fourth power of the natural logarithm of (x+3).

The fact they use ln instead of log is decisive.

The first notation is to be avoided: there are already two notations for the base of a logarithm: ##^e\log y## and ##\log_e y## for ##\ln y## and this looks too much like a third notation for the same, which it is NOT.
 
when i tried it on symbolab.com i subtract them both and i'd come up with answer of 0

does that mean they are equal?
 
I don't acknowledge that kind of authority in a website. But yes, they are equal for the reason that they describe one and the same thing: the fourth power of the natural logarithm of (x+3).
 
ok, thank you very much
 
funlord said:
View attachment 88026
are they equal?
BvU said:
The first notation is to be avoided: there are already two notations for the base of a logarithm: ##^e\log y## and ##\log_e y## for ##\ln y## and this looks too much like a third notation for the same, which it is NOT.
Just for the record, I have never seen this notation -- ##^e\log y##. By "never" I mean in the past 55+ years. That's not to say that someone hasn't used it somewhere, but if so, it's certainly not in common usage. The notation ##\log_e y## is rarely used, since ##\ln y## is defined to mean log, base e, of y.

If someone were to write ##\log^4 (x + 3)##, I would interpret this to mean the same as ##(\log(x + 3))^4## following the usual shorthand as used in powers of trig functions. I would also interpret the log base to be 10, but in some contexts the implied log base could be e or possibly 2, in computer science textbooks.
 
Mark44 said:
Just for the record, I have never seen this notation -- ##^e\log y##. By "never" I mean in the past 55+ years. That's not to say that someone hasn't used it somewhere, but if so, it's certainly not in common usage. The notation ##\log_e y## is rarely used, since ##\ln y## is defined to mean log, base e, of y.

If someone were to write ##\log^4 (x + 3)##, I would interpret this to mean the same as ##(\log(x + 3))^4## following the usual shorthand as used in powers of trig functions. I would also interpret the log base to be 10, but in some contexts the implied log base could be e or possibly 2, in computer science textbooks.
I now miss how you DO write ##^4\log 16 = 2## ? With the rarely used notation ?

Writing ##^4\log 16## is pretty common in Europe...

Ah, wait, of course ##
^e\log y ## is rarely used because ##\ln y## exists. In fact ##
\log y =\ ^e\log y\ ## for a lot of decent people (mathematicians, for one) :smile: !
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K