Solve Natural Log Equation: ln(x+1)-ln(x)=0

AI Thread Summary
The equation ln(x+1) - ln(x) = 0 leads to the conclusion that there is no real solution for x, as it simplifies to x + 1 = x, which is impossible. Despite a TI-84 calculator suggesting a solution at approximately 9.785 x 10^98, this is attributed to round-off errors in calculations. When checking the values, ln(10.785 x 10^98) - ln(9.785 x 10^98) results in approximately 0.0907, not 0. The discussion emphasizes the importance of recognizing round-off errors when dealing with large numbers in logarithmic calculations. Ultimately, the consensus is that no real x satisfies the original equation.
max0005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Given the Equation ln(x+1)-ln(x)=0 find x (If it exists.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



ln(x+1)-ln(x)=0

ln(x+1)=ln(x)

x+1 = x

1 = x-x

Solution does not exist. (My book "agrees" with me in the solutions.)

However, typing up the equation in my TI-84 and using the equation solver it finds a solution at around 9.785*10^98. (Which, in fact, works.)

Am I doing something wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, it doesn't work. For x= 9.875 x 10^90, ln(x+1)- ln(x) is about 0.0907, not 0. I don't know exactly what you did but I suspect that the "10^98" caused a round off error. I did ln(10.785 x 10^98)- ln(9.785 x 10^98) the "hard way" first, ln(10.785 x 10^98)= ln(10.785)+ 98/ln(10),and the same for ln(9.785 x 10^98, and then simply as ln(10.785 x 10^98/9.785 x 10^98)= ln(10.785/9.785)= 0.0907..., not 0. There is no real x satifying ln(x+1)- ln(x)=0.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, thanks! :D

I just wanted to be sure I hadn't missed out on anything.
 
max0005 said:
However, typing up the equation in my TI-84 and using the equation solver it finds a solution at around 9.785*10^98. (Which, in fact, works.)

If you're wondering why you were getting 0, it was roundoff error. Depending on what computer system you use, subtracting two values that are relatively the same will give you 0.
 
Ok, got it, thanks! :D
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, it doesn't work. For x= 9.875 x 10^90, ln(x+1)- ln(x) is about 0.0907, not 0. I don't know exactly what you did but I suspect that the "10^98" caused a round off error. I did ln(10.785 x 10^98)- ln(9.785 x 10^98) the "hard way" first, ln(10.785 x 10^98)= ln(10.785)+ 98/ln(10),and the same for ln(9.785 x 10^98, and then simply as ln(10.785 x 10^98/9.785 x 10^98)= ln(10.785/9.785)= 0.0907..., not 0. There is no real x satifying ln(x+1)- ln(x)=0.

just to clarify 9.785 x 10^98 + 1 is NOT equal to 10.785 x 10^98.
 
I don't believe that was ever in question!
 
Yes there is a "kind of" solution x=infinite... your calculator just approximate infinite by a very large number of the order 10^98 ... But ofcourse infinite cannot be considered as a solution to an equation.
 
HallsofIvy said:
I don't believe that was ever in question!

It definitely wasn't. But in your calculations of ln(x+1) - ln(x), u have calculated ln(10.785/9.785). Though it doesn't change the logic behind your explanation, I was just clarifying that the numbers are wrong.
 
  • #10
If you punch 10^{99}-(10^{99}-1) into your calculator you will get 0. Again just another demonstration of roundoff errors.

This is another reason why it's sometimes a good idea to do some easy simplifications to an expression before punching it in.
 
  • #11
praharmitra said:
It definitely wasn't. But in your calculations of ln(x+1) - ln(x), u have calculated ln(10.785/9.785). Though it doesn't change the logic behind your explanation, I was just clarifying that the numbers are wrong.
Finally, the coin drops! Of course you are right. Thanks.
 
Back
Top