Y=e^xlna increases less quickly than y=e^x when a<e e. i. lna<1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter solve
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
12 replies · 4K views
solve
Messages
94
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I find this a bit tough to digest. Can somebody, please, elaborate?

"Because lna<1 when a<e you can see that the graph increases less quickly than the graph of e^x.."

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Shouldn't e^xlna > e^x even if lna<1 ?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is

[tex]\frac{1}{2}e^x>e^x[/tex] ??

Of course not, because whatever ex is (we would determine its value if we were given x) half of it is always less since ex>0 for all x.

You can't extend this concept for all problems however. It wouldn't be completely true that [tex]x\ln(a)<x[/tex] for 0<a<e because if x = -2 for example, then half or any other value of ln(a), [itex]-2\ln(a)>-2[/itex]

So keep in mind when doing these problems that you're dealing with a special case that ex>0 for all x.
 
Mentallic said:
Is

[tex]\frac{1}{2}e^x>e^x[/tex] ??

Of course not, because whatever ex is (we would determine its value if we were given x) half of it is always less since ex>0 for all x.

You can't extend this concept for all problems however. It wouldn't be completely true that [tex]x\ln(a)<x[/tex] for 0<a<e because if x = -2 for example, then half or any other value of ln(a), [itex]-2\ln(a)>-2[/itex]

So keep in mind when doing these problems that you're dealing with a special case that ex>0 for all x.

Is e^xlna=lna*e^x ?

So, if a=1 and lna=0, then e^xlna<e^x, because e^xlna will equal 0 ?

Thank You.
 
solve said:
Is e^xlna=lna*e^x ?
Yes, they're equivalent. I prefer to have the log function at the end though just because people can confuse lna* ex with [itex]\ln(a*e^x) = \ln a+\ln (e^x) = \ln a + x[/itex] so if you do it that way, just be sure to add parenthesis in the right places, mainly ln(a)*ex
solve said:
So, if a=1 and lna=0, then e^xlna<e^x, because e^xlna will equal 0 ?

Thank You.
Yep! And if a=e then lna=1 so ex*lna = ex in this case.
Also remember the rules of logs that you can only take the log of a number greater than zero, so when we say exlna < ex we need to add that this is only true for 0<a<e
 
Mentallic said:
Yes, they're equivalent. I prefer to have the log function at the end though just because people can confuse lna* ex with [itex]\ln(a*e^x) = \ln a+\ln (e^x) = \ln a + x[/itex] so if you do it that way, just be sure to add parenthesis in the right places, mainly ln(a)*ex

Yep! And if a=e then lna=1 so ex*lna = ex in this case.
Also remember the rules of logs that you can only take the log of a number greater than zero, so when we say exlna < ex we need to add that this is only true for 0<a<e

Thank You, Mentallic. It made my day.
 
solve said:

Homework Statement



I find this a bit tough to digest. Can somebody, please, elaborate?

"Because lna<1 when a<e you can see that the graph increases less quickly than the graph of e^x.."

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Shouldn't e^xlna > e^x even if lna<1 ?

Thanks.

Since you fail to use brackets, it is not clear what your expression e^xlna means. Is it [tex]e^{x \ln(a)} \mbox{ or } e^x \ln(a)?[/tex]

RGV
 
Last edited:
Ray Vickson said:
Since you fail to use brackets, it is not clear what your expression e^xlna means. Is it [tex]e^{x \ln(a)} \mbox{ or } e^x \ln(a)?[/tex]

RGV

The first one. E to the power of X times natural log of A. Sorry for the ambiguity.
 
solve said:
The first one. E to the power of X times natural log of A. Sorry for the ambiguity.

Oh... This whole time I was going with the second one

[tex]e^{x\ln(a)}[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\left(e^{\ln(a)}\right)^x[/tex] :wink:edit: Something I have to note because I was going on the assumption that you were talking about [tex]e^x\cdot \ln(a)[/tex]

solve said:
Is e^xlna=lna*e^x ?
No.

Sorry about getting the wrong ideas into your head. Keep in mind that everything I've been saying was intended to address the question of why [tex]\ln(a)\cdot e^x < e^x[/tex] for 0<a<e

The answer you're looking for however is in the hint I provided above about using the indice laws.
 
Last edited:
Mentallic said:
Oh... This whole time I was going with the second one

[tex]\left(e^{\ln(a)}\right)^x[/tex]

[tex]\left(e^{\ln(a)}\right)^x[/tex] = a^x here?
 
Please, check to see if this is what I was trying to see from the get-go.

1. e^[x*ln(a)] <e^x if a<e

If a=2 and ln(a)=0.69, then

e^[x*ln(a)]: x=2, y=4 (approx)

e^x: x=2, y=8 (approx)

Here, y=e^x grows faster than y=e^[x*ln(a)]

2. e^[x*ln(a)] > e^x if a>e

If a=3 and ln(a)=1.1, then

e^[x*ln(a)]: x=4, y=81 (approx)

e^x: x=4, y=54(approx)

Here, y=e^[x*ln(a)] grows faster than y=e^x
 
solve said:
[tex]\left(e^{\ln(a)}\right)^x[/tex] = a^x here?

Yes, and since a<e, [tex]a^x<e^x[/tex] which is essentially all you need to understand.

solve said:
Please, check to see if this is what I was trying to see from the get-go.

1. e^[x*ln(a)] <e^x if a<e

If a=2 and ln(a)=0.69, then

e^[x*ln(a)]: x=2, y=4 (approx)
y=4 exactly, not approximately. If a=2 then [tex]e^{x\ln(a)}=\left(e^{\ln(a)}\right)^x=a^x=2^2=4[/tex]

solve said:
e^x: x=2, y=8 (approx)

Here, y=e^x grows faster than y=e^[x*ln(a)]

2. e^[x*ln(a)] > e^x if a>e

If a=3 and ln(a)=1.1, then

e^[x*ln(a)]: x=4, y=81 (approx)

e^x: x=4, y=54(approx)

Here, y=e^[x*ln(a)] grows faster than y=e^x

Yes, pretty much. Using a few test values can help you get the idea of what is happening, but don't use it as an absolute proof.
 
Mentallic said:
Yes, and since a<e, [tex]a^x<e^x[/tex] which is essentially all you need to understand.

Simple and elegant. This settles it. Thank You again, Mentallic.
 
solve said:
Simple and elegant. This settles it. Thank You again, Mentallic.

No worries, and sorry again about wasting your time and confusing you with all that nonsense before.