[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg96282] Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm
*From*: "slawek" <human at site.pl>
*Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 05:16:33 -0500 (EST)
*References*: <200902031132.GAA00303@smc.vnet.net> <gmrm45$9m4$1@smc.vnet.net>
U¿ytkownik "Lou Talman" <talmanl at mscd.edu> napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
news:gmrm45$9m4$1 at smc.vnet.net...
> The notational distinction between "ln" and "log" makes sense for
> engineers who must use both natural logarithms and common
> logarithms. But in advanced mathematics there is only one logarithm.
False. The ln/log/alog was introduced when base ten logarithms was applied
to calculation like:
2*5 = ... log 2 = 0.3010, log 5 = 0.6990, 0.3010+0.6990 = 1.0000, alog 1 =
10 ...
therefore 2*5 is just 10
BTW, I still memorize log 2 and log 5 and log pi, so I have no need look for
above values in tables and/or calculators/computers. :)
I trully advanced mathematics there are infinitely many logaritms, because
you can pick any base. It is a rather sense of taste to use e = 2.71... as a
base, sometimes it may be a convenient choose, sometimes not. I is the
similar to choose decimal numbers instead hexes.
slawek
Prev by Date:
**Re: weather blog and ListStreamPlot sampling**
Next by Date:
**Dynamic changing of variables**
Previous by thread:
** Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm**
Next by thread:
**Re: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm**
| |