$mathrm{Log}(prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k))=sum_{k=1}^n (mathrm{Log}(1+a_k))$
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $a_1,ldots a_nin mathbb{C}$, $|a_j|<1$
for each $j=1,ldots n$ such that $left| prod_{k=1}^j (1+a_k)-1 right| < 1$.
Show that
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)right)=sum_{k=1}^n (mathrm{Log}(1+a_k))$$
Can anyone help?
complex-analysis
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $a_1,ldots a_nin mathbb{C}$, $|a_j|<1$
for each $j=1,ldots n$ such that $left| prod_{k=1}^j (1+a_k)-1 right| < 1$.
Show that
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)right)=sum_{k=1}^n (mathrm{Log}(1+a_k))$$
Can anyone help?
complex-analysis
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
1
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $a_1,ldots a_nin mathbb{C}$, $|a_j|<1$
for each $j=1,ldots n$ such that $left| prod_{k=1}^j (1+a_k)-1 right| < 1$.
Show that
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)right)=sum_{k=1}^n (mathrm{Log}(1+a_k))$$
Can anyone help?
complex-analysis
Let $a_1,ldots a_nin mathbb{C}$, $|a_j|<1$
for each $j=1,ldots n$ such that $left| prod_{k=1}^j (1+a_k)-1 right| < 1$.
Show that
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)right)=sum_{k=1}^n (mathrm{Log}(1+a_k))$$
Can anyone help?
complex-analysis
complex-analysis
edited Nov 14 at 22:33
ignorantFid
21916
21916
asked Nov 14 at 20:26
widich
83
83
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
1
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49
|
show 1 more comment
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
1
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
1
1
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let $mathrm{Log}$ denote the (holomorphic) principal branch of the complex logarithm, defined on $G = { z in mathbb{C} mid z notin (-infty,0] }$, whose imaginary part lies in the interval $(-pi,pi)$. This means that for $z in (0,infty)$ the value of $mathrm{Log}(z)$ is the ordinary real logarithm of $z$.
Let us start with $n = 2$. Since $lvert a_1 rvert, lvert a_2 rvert < 1$, we see that $1 + a_j$ have positive real parts so that we can write $1 + a_j = r_je^{iphi_j}$ with $r_j >0$ and $phi_j in (-frac{pi}{2}, frac{pi}{2})$. Therefore $phi_1 + phi_2 ne -pi$ and we conclude $(1+a_1)(1+a_2) in G$. Let $D = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z rvert < 1 }$ and define
$$f : D times D to mathbb{C}, f(z_1,z_2) = mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) - sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) .$$
We have $e^{f(z_1,z_2)} = 1$ for all $z_1,z_2$, hence $f$ must have values in $2pi i mathbb{Z} = { 2 pi i k mid k in mathbb{Z} }$. Since $f$ is continuous and $D times D$ is connected, also $f(D times D)$ is connected, and this implies that $f$ must be constant. But $f(0,0) = 0$ which proves that $f equiv 0$. Thus the claim is true for $n=2$.
Note that it is essential that $mathrm{Log}$ was chosen as the principal branch, otherwise we would have $mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) = sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) + 2pi i l$ for some fixed $l ne 0$. In fact, if $mathrm{Log}$ is a different branch on $G$, then $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some fixed $k ne 0$ and therefore $f equiv f(0,0) = -2pi i k$.
We finish the proof by induction. The equation is true for $n=1,2$. Assume it is true for some $n ge 2$. For $n+1$ we argue as follows.
Let $b = prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)-1$. Then $lvert b rvert < 1$ and $ prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k) = (1+b)(1+a_{n+1})$. Hence
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k)right) = mathrm{Log}left((1+b) (1+a_{n+1})right) = mathrm{Log}(1+b) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1})$$
$$= sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1}) = sum_{k=1}^{n+1} mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) .$$
ADDED:
We can reformulate the above "theorem" as follows.
Let $U = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z - 1 rvert < 1 } subset G$ be the open disk with center $1$ and radius $1$, and let $mathrm{Log}$ be a holomorphic branch of the logarithm on $G$. It is uniquely determined by the value $mathrm{Log}(1)$ which has the form $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some $k in mathbb{Z}$.
If $A_1,dots,A_n in U$ and $prod_{k=1}^j A_k in U$ for $j =1,dots,n$, then
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n A_k right) = sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}A_k - (n-1) cdot2 pi i k .$$
This is proved as above. Now set $a_k = A_k-1$.
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let $mathrm{Log}$ denote the (holomorphic) principal branch of the complex logarithm, defined on $G = { z in mathbb{C} mid z notin (-infty,0] }$, whose imaginary part lies in the interval $(-pi,pi)$. This means that for $z in (0,infty)$ the value of $mathrm{Log}(z)$ is the ordinary real logarithm of $z$.
Let us start with $n = 2$. Since $lvert a_1 rvert, lvert a_2 rvert < 1$, we see that $1 + a_j$ have positive real parts so that we can write $1 + a_j = r_je^{iphi_j}$ with $r_j >0$ and $phi_j in (-frac{pi}{2}, frac{pi}{2})$. Therefore $phi_1 + phi_2 ne -pi$ and we conclude $(1+a_1)(1+a_2) in G$. Let $D = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z rvert < 1 }$ and define
$$f : D times D to mathbb{C}, f(z_1,z_2) = mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) - sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) .$$
We have $e^{f(z_1,z_2)} = 1$ for all $z_1,z_2$, hence $f$ must have values in $2pi i mathbb{Z} = { 2 pi i k mid k in mathbb{Z} }$. Since $f$ is continuous and $D times D$ is connected, also $f(D times D)$ is connected, and this implies that $f$ must be constant. But $f(0,0) = 0$ which proves that $f equiv 0$. Thus the claim is true for $n=2$.
Note that it is essential that $mathrm{Log}$ was chosen as the principal branch, otherwise we would have $mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) = sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) + 2pi i l$ for some fixed $l ne 0$. In fact, if $mathrm{Log}$ is a different branch on $G$, then $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some fixed $k ne 0$ and therefore $f equiv f(0,0) = -2pi i k$.
We finish the proof by induction. The equation is true for $n=1,2$. Assume it is true for some $n ge 2$. For $n+1$ we argue as follows.
Let $b = prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)-1$. Then $lvert b rvert < 1$ and $ prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k) = (1+b)(1+a_{n+1})$. Hence
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k)right) = mathrm{Log}left((1+b) (1+a_{n+1})right) = mathrm{Log}(1+b) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1})$$
$$= sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1}) = sum_{k=1}^{n+1} mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) .$$
ADDED:
We can reformulate the above "theorem" as follows.
Let $U = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z - 1 rvert < 1 } subset G$ be the open disk with center $1$ and radius $1$, and let $mathrm{Log}$ be a holomorphic branch of the logarithm on $G$. It is uniquely determined by the value $mathrm{Log}(1)$ which has the form $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some $k in mathbb{Z}$.
If $A_1,dots,A_n in U$ and $prod_{k=1}^j A_k in U$ for $j =1,dots,n$, then
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n A_k right) = sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}A_k - (n-1) cdot2 pi i k .$$
This is proved as above. Now set $a_k = A_k-1$.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let $mathrm{Log}$ denote the (holomorphic) principal branch of the complex logarithm, defined on $G = { z in mathbb{C} mid z notin (-infty,0] }$, whose imaginary part lies in the interval $(-pi,pi)$. This means that for $z in (0,infty)$ the value of $mathrm{Log}(z)$ is the ordinary real logarithm of $z$.
Let us start with $n = 2$. Since $lvert a_1 rvert, lvert a_2 rvert < 1$, we see that $1 + a_j$ have positive real parts so that we can write $1 + a_j = r_je^{iphi_j}$ with $r_j >0$ and $phi_j in (-frac{pi}{2}, frac{pi}{2})$. Therefore $phi_1 + phi_2 ne -pi$ and we conclude $(1+a_1)(1+a_2) in G$. Let $D = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z rvert < 1 }$ and define
$$f : D times D to mathbb{C}, f(z_1,z_2) = mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) - sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) .$$
We have $e^{f(z_1,z_2)} = 1$ for all $z_1,z_2$, hence $f$ must have values in $2pi i mathbb{Z} = { 2 pi i k mid k in mathbb{Z} }$. Since $f$ is continuous and $D times D$ is connected, also $f(D times D)$ is connected, and this implies that $f$ must be constant. But $f(0,0) = 0$ which proves that $f equiv 0$. Thus the claim is true for $n=2$.
Note that it is essential that $mathrm{Log}$ was chosen as the principal branch, otherwise we would have $mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) = sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) + 2pi i l$ for some fixed $l ne 0$. In fact, if $mathrm{Log}$ is a different branch on $G$, then $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some fixed $k ne 0$ and therefore $f equiv f(0,0) = -2pi i k$.
We finish the proof by induction. The equation is true for $n=1,2$. Assume it is true for some $n ge 2$. For $n+1$ we argue as follows.
Let $b = prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)-1$. Then $lvert b rvert < 1$ and $ prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k) = (1+b)(1+a_{n+1})$. Hence
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k)right) = mathrm{Log}left((1+b) (1+a_{n+1})right) = mathrm{Log}(1+b) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1})$$
$$= sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1}) = sum_{k=1}^{n+1} mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) .$$
ADDED:
We can reformulate the above "theorem" as follows.
Let $U = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z - 1 rvert < 1 } subset G$ be the open disk with center $1$ and radius $1$, and let $mathrm{Log}$ be a holomorphic branch of the logarithm on $G$. It is uniquely determined by the value $mathrm{Log}(1)$ which has the form $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some $k in mathbb{Z}$.
If $A_1,dots,A_n in U$ and $prod_{k=1}^j A_k in U$ for $j =1,dots,n$, then
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n A_k right) = sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}A_k - (n-1) cdot2 pi i k .$$
This is proved as above. Now set $a_k = A_k-1$.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let $mathrm{Log}$ denote the (holomorphic) principal branch of the complex logarithm, defined on $G = { z in mathbb{C} mid z notin (-infty,0] }$, whose imaginary part lies in the interval $(-pi,pi)$. This means that for $z in (0,infty)$ the value of $mathrm{Log}(z)$ is the ordinary real logarithm of $z$.
Let us start with $n = 2$. Since $lvert a_1 rvert, lvert a_2 rvert < 1$, we see that $1 + a_j$ have positive real parts so that we can write $1 + a_j = r_je^{iphi_j}$ with $r_j >0$ and $phi_j in (-frac{pi}{2}, frac{pi}{2})$. Therefore $phi_1 + phi_2 ne -pi$ and we conclude $(1+a_1)(1+a_2) in G$. Let $D = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z rvert < 1 }$ and define
$$f : D times D to mathbb{C}, f(z_1,z_2) = mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) - sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) .$$
We have $e^{f(z_1,z_2)} = 1$ for all $z_1,z_2$, hence $f$ must have values in $2pi i mathbb{Z} = { 2 pi i k mid k in mathbb{Z} }$. Since $f$ is continuous and $D times D$ is connected, also $f(D times D)$ is connected, and this implies that $f$ must be constant. But $f(0,0) = 0$ which proves that $f equiv 0$. Thus the claim is true for $n=2$.
Note that it is essential that $mathrm{Log}$ was chosen as the principal branch, otherwise we would have $mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) = sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) + 2pi i l$ for some fixed $l ne 0$. In fact, if $mathrm{Log}$ is a different branch on $G$, then $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some fixed $k ne 0$ and therefore $f equiv f(0,0) = -2pi i k$.
We finish the proof by induction. The equation is true for $n=1,2$. Assume it is true for some $n ge 2$. For $n+1$ we argue as follows.
Let $b = prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)-1$. Then $lvert b rvert < 1$ and $ prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k) = (1+b)(1+a_{n+1})$. Hence
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k)right) = mathrm{Log}left((1+b) (1+a_{n+1})right) = mathrm{Log}(1+b) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1})$$
$$= sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1}) = sum_{k=1}^{n+1} mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) .$$
ADDED:
We can reformulate the above "theorem" as follows.
Let $U = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z - 1 rvert < 1 } subset G$ be the open disk with center $1$ and radius $1$, and let $mathrm{Log}$ be a holomorphic branch of the logarithm on $G$. It is uniquely determined by the value $mathrm{Log}(1)$ which has the form $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some $k in mathbb{Z}$.
If $A_1,dots,A_n in U$ and $prod_{k=1}^j A_k in U$ for $j =1,dots,n$, then
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n A_k right) = sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}A_k - (n-1) cdot2 pi i k .$$
This is proved as above. Now set $a_k = A_k-1$.
Let $mathrm{Log}$ denote the (holomorphic) principal branch of the complex logarithm, defined on $G = { z in mathbb{C} mid z notin (-infty,0] }$, whose imaginary part lies in the interval $(-pi,pi)$. This means that for $z in (0,infty)$ the value of $mathrm{Log}(z)$ is the ordinary real logarithm of $z$.
Let us start with $n = 2$. Since $lvert a_1 rvert, lvert a_2 rvert < 1$, we see that $1 + a_j$ have positive real parts so that we can write $1 + a_j = r_je^{iphi_j}$ with $r_j >0$ and $phi_j in (-frac{pi}{2}, frac{pi}{2})$. Therefore $phi_1 + phi_2 ne -pi$ and we conclude $(1+a_1)(1+a_2) in G$. Let $D = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z rvert < 1 }$ and define
$$f : D times D to mathbb{C}, f(z_1,z_2) = mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) - sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) .$$
We have $e^{f(z_1,z_2)} = 1$ for all $z_1,z_2$, hence $f$ must have values in $2pi i mathbb{Z} = { 2 pi i k mid k in mathbb{Z} }$. Since $f$ is continuous and $D times D$ is connected, also $f(D times D)$ is connected, and this implies that $f$ must be constant. But $f(0,0) = 0$ which proves that $f equiv 0$. Thus the claim is true for $n=2$.
Note that it is essential that $mathrm{Log}$ was chosen as the principal branch, otherwise we would have $mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^2 (1+z_k)right) = sum_{k=1}^2 mathrm{Log}(1+z_k) + 2pi i l$ for some fixed $l ne 0$. In fact, if $mathrm{Log}$ is a different branch on $G$, then $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some fixed $k ne 0$ and therefore $f equiv f(0,0) = -2pi i k$.
We finish the proof by induction. The equation is true for $n=1,2$. Assume it is true for some $n ge 2$. For $n+1$ we argue as follows.
Let $b = prod_{k=1}^n (1+a_k)-1$. Then $lvert b rvert < 1$ and $ prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k) = (1+b)(1+a_{n+1})$. Hence
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (1+a_k)right) = mathrm{Log}left((1+b) (1+a_{n+1})right) = mathrm{Log}(1+b) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1})$$
$$= sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) + mathrm{Log} (1+a_{n+1}) = sum_{k=1}^{n+1} mathrm{Log}(1+a_k) .$$
ADDED:
We can reformulate the above "theorem" as follows.
Let $U = { z in mathbb{C} mid lvert z - 1 rvert < 1 } subset G$ be the open disk with center $1$ and radius $1$, and let $mathrm{Log}$ be a holomorphic branch of the logarithm on $G$. It is uniquely determined by the value $mathrm{Log}(1)$ which has the form $mathrm{Log}(1) = 2 pi i k$ for some $k in mathbb{Z}$.
If $A_1,dots,A_n in U$ and $prod_{k=1}^j A_k in U$ for $j =1,dots,n$, then
$$mathrm{Log}left(prod_{k=1}^n A_k right) = sum_{k=1}^n mathrm{Log}A_k - (n-1) cdot2 pi i k .$$
This is proved as above. Now set $a_k = A_k-1$.
edited Nov 15 at 8:45
answered Nov 15 at 0:45
Paul Frost
7,4341527
7,4341527
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2998780%2fmathrmlog-prod-k-1n-1a-k-sum-k-1n-mathrmlog1a-k%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Welcome to Maths SX! Please type your formulæ using MathJax.
– Bernard
Nov 14 at 20:34
As @Bernard said, try to use MathJax (or Latex) for the mathematical formulae. This time, I edited your post, and you can have an idea how to do it. Good luck, and welcome to MSE!
– user559615
Nov 14 at 20:43
1
Forgive me If I'm wrong. I think you should have to apply log property $log ab=log a+log b$
– IEDC PHY
Nov 14 at 21:57
Hi, I think the principal value Log still has most of the same properties so might be able to do what @IEDCPHY had said
– Questlove
Nov 14 at 22:37
@IEDCPHY It is not true that $Log , ab =Log, a +Log, b$ for all non-zero complex numbers $a,b$ so the question is not entirely trivial.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 14 at 23:49