Solve Exponentials Problem: ln((V+v)/(V-v)) = 2ctV

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nevermore
  • Start date Start date
Nevermore
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I have ln((V+v)/(V-v)) = 2ctV, and I've checked this is right. But how do I go from here to v = V((e^Vct - e^-Vct)/(e^Vct+e^-Vct))? The solutions just give them as successive lines.

(I appreciate that's not the easiest thing to read, it's taken from the 2004 MEI specimen paper for A-level Mechanics 4, if that helps.)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
HINT: Laws of logs;

\ln\frac{a}{b} = \ln|a| - \ln|b|
 
OK, so
ln((V+v)/(V-v)) = 2ctV
=> ln(V+v)-ln(V-v) = 2ctV
ln(V)ln(v) - ln(V)/ln(v)
2ln(v) = 2ctV
v = e^Vct

Is this right? Where can I go from here?
 
Nevermore said:
OK, so
ln((V+v)/(V-v)) = 2ctV
=> ln(V+v)-ln(V-v) = 2ctV
ln(V)ln(v) - ln(V)/ln(v)
2ln(v) = 2ctV
v = e^Vct

Is this right? Where can I go from here?

there is something wrong in what u have written... first of all
log(a*b) = log(a) + log(b)...what u have used is log(a+b) = log(a) * log(b)..even after that u have written something wrong...check it once more...
anyway u don't need to use that...use the basic definition of logs...
if ln(a) = b
=> e^b = a
 
In other words,
\frac{V+v}{V-v}= e^{2ctV}
Solve that for v.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top