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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation ln(x+1) - ln(x) = 0, with participants exploring the existence of solutions for x. The subject area involves logarithmic functions and their properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the original poster's attempt to solve the equation and question the validity of the solution found using a calculator. There is a focus on potential round-off errors and the implications of large numbers in calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the calculations and questioning the assumptions made regarding the existence of a solution. Some participants suggest that the large values lead to inaccuracies, while others clarify misunderstandings about the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of round-off errors in calculations involving large numbers, and participants are considering the implications of these errors on the validity of the solution. The original poster expresses concern about missing information in their approach.

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 [tex]10^{99}-(10^{99}-1)[/tex] 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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K