log's

[Anonymous No.2440746]

So whats the ln(e^52)=???
1 hw question i cannot get:p
also a proof would be nice:)

[Anonymous No.2440756]

>>2440746
bump

[Anonymous No.2440760]

>>2440753
why is it 52?

[Anonymous No.2440753]

It's 52.

[Anonymous No.2440772]

honestly simple logs and no one on sci can explain this shit to me?

[Anonymous No.2440774]

>>2440760
<div class="math">log (a^b) = alog(b)</div><div class="math">ln (e^52) = 52ln(e)</div>

[Anonymous No.2440776]

>>2440772

the reward isn't worth the effort; simple psychology.

[Anonymous No.2440777]

>>2440760

ln(e^x) equals x

ln of e is always the exponent

[Anonymous No.2440781]

>>2440774
that second line should be (inline)e^{52}(/inline)

[Anonymous No.2440785]

The natural log is just taking the log of a number to the base e. If you take the natural log of e, then you are essentially cancelling out the natural log and the e, leaving the power.

[Anonymous No.2440787]

>>2440760
because it's not 53

[Anonymous No.2440786]

>>2440781
fuck you tags

[Anonymous No.2440791]

>>2440774
>>2440777

Thank you very helpful seeing as my instructor is a dumb fuck, its nice to know that at least one person on /sci/ isnt a suedo scientist:p

[Anonymous No.2440801]

high school junior
>mfw thats my biology book
>mfw i cba to have a face
also that is reeeeally simple. 52 is obvious but cba for proof.

[i- !LoVeEKpnh2 No.2440802]

>>2440791
suedo make me a sandwich

[Anonymous No.2440821]

its pretty close to 51

[Anonymous No.2440838]

>>2440786
it's not jmath's fault that you suck at basic LaTeX.

Btw, do not fucking use math tags and then write verbatim "log(x)" you stupid piece of shit. If you wanna molest people with this useless javascript AIDS at least learn some latex before you completely embarrass yourself, fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.2440842]

the logarithm to base e is the inverse function of the real exponential function by default. This isn't even a question.