Proving Logarithmic Rule: log_a(x^k)=klog_ax

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hypochondriac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logarithmic
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the logarithmic rule: log_a(x^k) = k log_a(x). Participants express varying levels of familiarity with logarithmic properties, particularly focusing on this specific rule.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the proof of the logarithmic rule and expresses uncertainty about how to proceed. Some participants suggest using the property of logarithms involving multiplication, while others propose a method involving exponential forms and anti-logarithms. There is discussion about the feasibility of using the rule itself in the proof process.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, exploring different approaches to the proof. Some have provided steps that outline a potential proof without reaching a consensus on the best method. The conversation reflects a mix of attempts and clarifications regarding the use of logarithmic properties.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of constraints related to the original poster's upcoming exam, which adds urgency to their request for guidance. Participants also note the importance of not using the rule being proven in the proof itself.

Hypochondriac
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
prove:
log_a(x^k)=klog_ax

i can do the addition and subtraction rules no problem, but for some reason I'm stuggling with this one,
just point me in the right direction, or help with the whole thing I'm not bothered, i just hope it aint in my exam tomorrow lol
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, one way of doing it is to write log(x^k) as log(x.x.x...x) [where there are k x's in the argument of the logarithm]. Then invoke the rule log(ab)=log(a)+log(b). Of course this only works for positive integers!

A better proof is to let y=log_a(x), so that a^y=x. Then x^k=(a^y)^k=a^(yk). Hence, log_a(x^k)=ky=k log_a(x).
 
thanks
but to get from x^k = a^(yk)
to log_a(x^k) = ky

you would need to go via the rule I'm trying to prove
ie log_a(x^k) = log_a(a^ky) = ky log_a(a) = 1ky
so i didnt know if that was a feasible move
 
No, you do not have to use the log rule that you are trying to prove to continue...

You want to prove: loga xk = k loga x

Proof:

(1) First, let y = loga x

(2) Rewite (1) in exponential form using anti-log: ay = x

(3) Next, add exponent k to both side and we have: ayk = xk

(4) Now you "log" both side to have: loga ayk = loga xk

(by logging both side you do not use the log rule you are trying to prove)​

(5) but we know the log rule said: logaayk = yk

(6) so (4) becomes: yk = loga xk

(7) but (1) said y = loga x

(8) so (6) becomes (loga x ) (k) = loga xk

(9) Re-arrange the left, we have: k loga x = loga xk

(10) Proof complete QED
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
10K
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K