MHB Raising both sides of equation to a common base

  • Thread starter Thread starter find_the_fun
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Base
find_the_fun
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
I've been doing something very wrong for a long time.
$$
ln|y| = kt+C $$
$$e^{ln|y|}=e^{kt}+e^C $$
$$ y=e^{kt}+e^c$$
which should have been
$$
e^{ln|y|}=e^{kt+C} $$
$$ y=e^{kt} \cdot e^C = Ae^{kt}$$

Is the idea you are operating on the entire RHS and LHS side as a whole?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
find_the_fun said:
I've been doing something very wrong for a long time.
$$
ln|y| = kt+C $$
$$e^{ln|y|}=e^{kt}+e^C $$
$$ y=e^{kt}+e^c$$
which should have been
$$
e^{ln|y|}=e^{kt+C} $$
$$ y=e^{kt} \cdot e^C = Ae^{kt}$$

Is the idea you are operating on the entire RHS and LHS side as a whole?

Yes, that is correct. In general we have that if $x = y$ then $f(x) = f(y)$ for any function $f$ (with suitable domain). Hence the entire LHS and RHS must be passed into the function, or it doesn't work. In this case we have:

$$e^{kt + C} = e^{kt} e^C = e^C e^{kt}$$

Where the $e^C$ term can then be thought of as another constant $A = e^C$, giving:

$$e^{kt + C} = A e^{kt}$$

Intuitively, exponentiation turns addition into multiplication, and multiplication into exponentiation. Conversely, logarithms turn exponentiation into multiplication, and multiplication into addition (and addition into... addition. you can't simplify $\log(a + b)$ in general).
 
The way I look at converting from logarithmic to exponential form is to use:

$$\log_a(b)=c\implies b=a^c$$
 
Pet peeve warning! Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

Note that [math]e^C = A[/math] implies A > 0, so you need to specify that when you list your final answer.

End of Pet Peeve.

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
Pet peeve warning! Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

Note that [math]e^C = A[/math] implies A > 0, so you need to specify that when you list your final answer.

End of Pet Peeve.

-Dan

With the absolute value on the argument of the log function, I would say we need not specify a restriction on $A$...also we likely have eliminated a trivial solution $y\equiv0$ and so this can be accounted for by letting $A$ be any real number. :D

However, you do raise a good point...we should be aware of any restrictions we may impose.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top