Subadditivity and Natural Logs

  • Thread starter Thread starter evad1089
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Natural
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that the natural logarithm function is not subadditive, specifically demonstrating that ln(a+b) > ln(a) + ln(b) for certain values of a and b. The user proposes a counter-example using a = 1 and b = x, where 0 < x < 1, concluding that ln(1+x) is positive while ln(1) + ln(x) yields a negative result. The conversation emphasizes the importance of rigorous proof in mathematics, as numerical evidence alone is deemed insufficient by mathematicians.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of natural logarithm properties
  • Familiarity with subadditivity concepts
  • Basic knowledge of inequalities in mathematics
  • Experience with proof techniques, particularly counter-examples
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of logarithmic functions in-depth
  • Learn about subadditivity and its implications in various mathematical contexts
  • Explore proof techniques, focusing on counter-examples in mathematical analysis
  • Investigate the implications of logarithmic inequalities in real analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in advanced mathematical proofs and properties of logarithmic functions.

evad1089
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that the natural logarithm is not subadditive.
You could use ln(1/2+1/3)\leqln(1/2)+ln(1/3), but mathematicians view all such numerical evidence as an invalid proof.

Homework Equations


ln(a+b)\leqln(a)+ln(b)

The Attempt at a Solution


ln(1/2+1/2)\leqln(1/2)+ln(1/2)

Well, my real question is what does the "mathematicians view all such numerical evidence as an invalid proof" mean? I am pretty sure this needs to be a proof by counter-example, which involves numerical evidence. What am I missing?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint:

ln(a)+ln(b) \geq ln(a+b)

ln(ab) \geq ln(a+b)

a>0, b>0
 
So, I am guessing that hint entails:

ab\geqa+b

_______
I have two other ideas, but I have tried every combination of them to get them both to be true... Nothing I try seems make it work.

I am thinking that the ln(ab) and ln(a+b) have to not be irrational for this to be a valid proof? Is my logic correct?

Also, I think a and b have to be some combination of 1 and ex...

Am I getting warm at all?
 
Well, I got frustrated and decided that a qualitative answer about the properties of a natural log is as good as a quantitative one, so:

My proof:

Show by counter example:

a = 1
b = x, 0<x<1

We know lnx is negative and ln1 = 0 by the properties of a logarithm.

Thus,

ln(a+b) has to be positive, because 1 + x, 0<x<1 is greater than one.

and

ln(a) + ln(b) has to be negative because ln(1) = ln(a) = 0 and ln(b) = ln(x) 0<x<1 = (negative number)

Furthermore,

ln(a+b)>ln(a)+ln(b)

Therefore, the natural log is not subadditive.

Works in my mind.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K