Integral of 1/x - base of logarithm
$begingroup$
I see a proof in https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.11965 (equation 3.36) that uses the following.
$log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$.
This seems to hinge on $int frac{1}{x} = log_2 x$ (the context is information theory), as opposed to $log_e(x)$. Why is this true?
integration logarithms
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I see a proof in https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.11965 (equation 3.36) that uses the following.
$log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$.
This seems to hinge on $int frac{1}{x} = log_2 x$ (the context is information theory), as opposed to $log_e(x)$. Why is this true?
integration logarithms
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
1
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I see a proof in https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.11965 (equation 3.36) that uses the following.
$log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$.
This seems to hinge on $int frac{1}{x} = log_2 x$ (the context is information theory), as opposed to $log_e(x)$. Why is this true?
integration logarithms
$endgroup$
I see a proof in https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.11965 (equation 3.36) that uses the following.
$log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$.
This seems to hinge on $int frac{1}{x} = log_2 x$ (the context is information theory), as opposed to $log_e(x)$. Why is this true?
integration logarithms
integration logarithms
edited Dec 11 '18 at 15:45
user1936752
asked Dec 11 '18 at 15:35
user1936752user1936752
5531513
5531513
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
1
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
1
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
1
1
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The notation in the paper is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Note that for $a > 0$,
$$
int_0^M frac{1}{a+s}ds = int_{a}^{M+a} frac{1}{s} ds = ln (M+a) - ln a.
$$
Therefore,
$$
int_0^M left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds =
ln (M+1) - ln 1 - (ln (M+x) - ln x).
$$
Therefore, by letting $M to infty$, we have
$$
int_0^infty left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds = ln x.
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3035408%2fintegral-of-1-x-base-of-logarithm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The notation in the paper is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The notation in the paper is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The notation in the paper is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
The notation in the paper is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
answered Dec 11 '18 at 19:45
mlerma54mlerma54
1,177148
1,177148
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Note that for $a > 0$,
$$
int_0^M frac{1}{a+s}ds = int_{a}^{M+a} frac{1}{s} ds = ln (M+a) - ln a.
$$
Therefore,
$$
int_0^M left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds =
ln (M+1) - ln 1 - (ln (M+x) - ln x).
$$
Therefore, by letting $M to infty$, we have
$$
int_0^infty left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds = ln x.
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Note that for $a > 0$,
$$
int_0^M frac{1}{a+s}ds = int_{a}^{M+a} frac{1}{s} ds = ln (M+a) - ln a.
$$
Therefore,
$$
int_0^M left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds =
ln (M+1) - ln 1 - (ln (M+x) - ln x).
$$
Therefore, by letting $M to infty$, we have
$$
int_0^infty left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds = ln x.
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Note that for $a > 0$,
$$
int_0^M frac{1}{a+s}ds = int_{a}^{M+a} frac{1}{s} ds = ln (M+a) - ln a.
$$
Therefore,
$$
int_0^M left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds =
ln (M+1) - ln 1 - (ln (M+x) - ln x).
$$
Therefore, by letting $M to infty$, we have
$$
int_0^infty left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds = ln x.
$$
$endgroup$
Note that for $a > 0$,
$$
int_0^M frac{1}{a+s}ds = int_{a}^{M+a} frac{1}{s} ds = ln (M+a) - ln a.
$$
Therefore,
$$
int_0^M left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds =
ln (M+1) - ln 1 - (ln (M+x) - ln x).
$$
Therefore, by letting $M to infty$, we have
$$
int_0^infty left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{x+s}right) ds = ln x.
$$
answered Dec 11 '18 at 15:51
induction601induction601
1,276314
1,276314
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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%2f3035408%2fintegral-of-1-x-base-of-logarithm%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
$begingroup$
It isn't? It is true up to a multiplied constant, though, since $log_2(x) = ln(x)/ln(2)$
$endgroup$
– Juan Sebastian Lozano
Dec 11 '18 at 15:41
$begingroup$
What is the "this" in "this seems to hinge"? The equation $log x = int_0^{infty} ds left(frac{1}{1+s} - frac{1}{s+x}right)$? If so, why do you say it seems to hinge on $int frac 1x$[sic] $= log_2x$? If something else in the article, what?
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Dec 11 '18 at 16:01
1
$begingroup$
The notation in the pape is a little confusing because in the classical part entropy is measured in bits and $log$ represents the base 2 logarithm, however part 3 deals with quantum entropy, and the definition by Von Newmann uses natural log - in fact the unit of entropy when using natural logarithm has a name, nat, nit, or nepit - see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(unit)
$endgroup$
– mlerma54
Dec 11 '18 at 16:08
$begingroup$
Ah @mlerma54, I think that's the error in my assumption then. I assumed quantum entropy also stayed in $log_2$. If you put your comment as an answer, I can accept it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– user1936752
Dec 11 '18 at 17:23