What is the problem with Log2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter asif zaidi
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding an approximate value for log(2) by using the upper sum method for the function f(x) = 1/x over the interval [1, 2]. The original poster expresses confusion regarding their calculations and the relationship between logarithms and integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply the definition of an integral to approximate log(2) but questions their result when comparing it to known values. They also explore the method's validity by applying it to a different function, f(x) = x^2.

Discussion Status

Participants have provided clarifications regarding the notation of logarithms, particularly the distinction between common logarithm and natural logarithm. The original poster acknowledges this clarification and notes that their answer now matches expectations.

Contextual Notes

There is a discussion about the conventions of logarithmic notation in different educational contexts, which may affect the understanding of the problem. The original poster's confusion appears to stem from these conventions.

asif zaidi
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Problem statement

Find an approximate value for log(2) by subdividing the interval [1,2] into sub-intervals of length 1/n and using this subdivision to compute the upper sum for the function f(x)=1/x. Compute the upper sum for n=1,2,...,10.

My solution
The way I approached this is as follows

Use the definition of integral: as n -> inf (\sum f(ci)*partition length)

a. take a partition of size 0.1 (as I have 10 points from 1-2)
b. find f(1.0) + f(1.1) + ... f(1.9) = 1/1 + 1/1.1 + 1/1.2 + ... 1/1.9 = 7.185
c. Multiply 7.185*0.1 = 0.7185

Obviously log2 = 0.301 ~= 0.7185/2. <--- Error.


To see if my understanding of integrals is right, I used same method for f(x) =x^2 from [1,2] and came up with the right answer. So what am I doing wrong with 1/x.


Thanks

Asif
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because you hit the log button instead of the ln button on your calculator :-p
 
You've hit an unfortunate boundary in math notation! In "elementary" course (say introductory calculus and below) typically "log" is used for the common log (base 10) and "ln" is used for the natural logarithm. Most calculators use "log" for common logarithm and "ln" for natural logarithm. But in higher level courses common logarithm is never used and "log" is used for the natural logarithm.

The function you get by integrating 1/x is the natural logarithm.
 
OK - thanks to both.
That explains it and my answer matches.
 
HallsofIvy said:
You've hit an unfortunate boundary in math notation! In "elementary" course (say introductory calculus and below) typically "log" is used for the common log (base 10) and "ln" is used for the natural logarithm. Most calculators use "log" for common logarithm and "ln" for natural logarithm. But in higher level courses common logarithm is never used and "log" is used for the natural logarithm.

The function you get by integrating 1/x is the natural logarithm.

Well, in my school, we are taught that 'ln' is natural logarithm, 'lg' is decimal logarithm (base 10) and 'log' is logarithm with any other base.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K