well...ln(x) does not cancel e^x....but...
given e^x, if we take the natural log of e^x then we have ln(e^x), well this means that we have an exponent...we recall that we can pull the exponent down infront of a logrithm...so we now have xln(e)
ah! the ln(e) is 1, we recall that ln's are base e and if we take the logrithm of the base we get 1. so we have x*1=x
so...likewise...lnx^2 is 2ln(x)...and thats all we can do
hope this helps
matttlocke
2006-11-15 07:32:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by matttlocke 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
ln(x) is another way to write "log base e of x"
If I had some number called (?), and I said that
(?) = ln(x)
I'm basically saying e to the (?) power is x.
If I had
(?) = ln(e^x), I'm saying e to the (?) power is e^x. Well duh, the (?) in this case could only be x. So yes, ln(e^x) is simply x.
Important: ln(1) is zero, and ln(e) is 1. Try to figure out why using the above examples.
Also, there is no special rule involving the square of a natural log.
Hope that helped,
UMRmathmajor
(p.s. These are important! You'll see them more in higher math.)
2006-11-15 14:36:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by UMRmathmajor 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes they are mutually anti-functions, except that with ln(x), the natural log, x MUST be > 0.
2006-11-15 16:05:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by rhino9joe 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't quite understand the question. ln(x) * e^x is not x, but ln(e^x) is.
2006-11-15 14:30:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Amy F 5
·
0⤊
0⤋