MathGroup Archive 2009

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm

It never fails to amaze me how dogmatic some people can be about the 
conventions of notation.

Or how hard it is for some people to notice a tongue planted firmly 
in a cheek.

On Feb 11, 2009, at 3:16 AM, slawek wrote:

> U=BFytkownik "Lou Talman" <talmanl at> napisa=B3 w wiadomo=B6ci
> news:gmrm45$9m4$1 at
>> 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:

--Lou Talman
   Department of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
   Metropolitan State College of Denver


  • Prev by Date: Re: Definition of the similarity in a set of integers
  • Next by Date: Re: testing if a point is inside a polygon
  • Previous by thread: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: Re: Log[x]//TraditionalForm