Calculate logarithms in your head! - Without calculator

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 10 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 214

  • @MathQueenSusanne
    @MathQueenSusanne  Місяць тому +41

    Hey math friends! If you’re enjoying this video, could you double-check that you’ve liked it and subscribed to the channel? It’s a simple equation: your support + my passion = more great content! Thanks for helping me keep this going - you’re the best!

    • @jacklondon999
      @jacklondon999 27 днів тому +1

      I love your program. What is it? "Fans only" for nerds?

    • @bjornardahl
      @bjornardahl 26 днів тому

      @MathQueenSusanne
      Liked and followed. Second video I saw from you this week. Best and simple explanation ever! Love that you run thru why, in each step and repeat basic rules. All the details one forget after a while. Fantastic way to teach math if one needs to refresh knowledge! 💪🏻💪🏻

    • @motthebug
      @motthebug 18 днів тому

      HOw di dyou get 22K subscribers in a month?

  • @feerrnn
    @feerrnn Місяць тому +42

    I love how you not only teach how to solve math problems, but also explain the fundamentals behind them. You do this in a simple and easy-to-understand way. thanks for video

    • @MattScottMusic
      @MattScottMusic Місяць тому

      Yes. I am learning all kinds of stuff I never quite grasped at school.

    • @AnikeadeJustina-z7m
      @AnikeadeJustina-z7m 15 днів тому

      Wow,can I be learn from you

    • @DexterHaven
      @DexterHaven 6 днів тому

      What fundamentals here did she give? 0:25 on.
      Better to say to the viewer first: "What is a log? Why do we use them and how? All a log is an exponent of a base number (usually 2, 10, or e) to arrive at another number, such as 16. We convert numbers to logarithms, historically, to speed up multiplication, since when we multiply numbers to the same base raised to an exponent we only need add the exponents. So to find the log of 16 to the more common base 2 we ask what power must 2 be raised to to equal 16? 2x2x2x2 = 16, so 2 to the 4th power, so it is = 4; now for this question of base 4, we asked the same question of 4 and we get 2, mindful that base 4 is not common in real life logs." That is how to teach the viewer to understand to point better, I submit; less reliance of rote steps; don't assume everyone knows why we even use logs today given calculators or their fundamentals.

  • @mondo851
    @mondo851 12 днів тому +4

    Math Queen, thank you for making mathematics accessible to this old geezer after I fled from the subject for decades. It's a miracle. 🤩

  • @rossk4864
    @rossk4864 Місяць тому +12

    It's been about 50 or 55 years since I directly applied this math, however, your clear instruction was the review I needed for it all to come back crystal clear!

  • @LORRAINEPIERCE-d3j
    @LORRAINEPIERCE-d3j 21 день тому +6

    Hey, Susanne, I am a retired teacher and have not done logs for 20 years. You surprised me with these in that I missed one, but picked up the skill with this video. Love 😍😍

  • @wyattonline
    @wyattonline 17 днів тому +6

    A math teacher/mentor with a sense of humor, how refreshing!

    • @PerriPaprikash
      @PerriPaprikash 15 днів тому

      specifically, what is it you found humorous about her? i think she might have bubbly personality, but that is not humorous.

  • @toferg.8264
    @toferg.8264 27 днів тому +5

    I like that you don’t skip steps. Your videoa are really good for people who are really struggling.

  • @Doc_Fartens
    @Doc_Fartens Місяць тому +8

    So glad your channel popped up in my Recommendations a week or so ago. I've always had a love of maths but have found that every teacher I've had at school went slightly too fast for me to keep up. The pace of your videos is perfect for me.

  • @terencebooth8271
    @terencebooth8271 16 днів тому +2

    My bachelor’s degree is math, and my other degrees required considerable math applications as did my career. I am 76 years old and retired and I really enjoy your channel as it helps keep my mind active, and it also helps me remember old knowledge I had forgotten. You may have nudged me to volunteer to tutor students having trouble with math (as long as it’s not partial differential equations).

  • @יהודהבלאס
    @יהודהבלאס Місяць тому +7

    Thank you very much for the examples and solutions. What’s beautiful about your approach is that you sense and empathize with our difficulty in solving😊

  • @darrenkamalu9047
    @darrenkamalu9047 3 дні тому

    It's nice that you make these videos. They are really good. But are the only people who listen to it the same people that already know the answer?
    Your explanations are great. Get them to those who don't have those skills.

  • @maddielazaridi9653
    @maddielazaridi9653 Місяць тому +7

    Very 😂good teacher. I am a grandma remembering my college mathematics.
    Thank you. It is fun!

  • @GeraldmapangaPhiri-cv1cx
    @GeraldmapangaPhiri-cv1cx 22 дні тому +5

    You born to be a teacher, you break the basics at best. No child can struggle with you

  • @ARNOLD-fl7hj
    @ARNOLD-fl7hj Місяць тому +3

    I like the repetition because it helps me to remember the steps to solve this type of math problem.Thanks!

  • @apobani5247
    @apobani5247 13 днів тому +2

    The math queen is not only smart but beautiful.
    Keep sharing your knowledge and passion.

  • @nissanbarua5196
    @nissanbarua5196 Місяць тому +6

    You are a great teacher.

  • @PatrickLaenen
    @PatrickLaenen Місяць тому +5

    I wish I had logarithms explained to me like you did in this video. I wouldn’t have struggled with them. Thanks so much for this 👍

  • @firstcoastmathclinic
    @firstcoastmathclinic 20 днів тому +2

    I like how you represent logarithms to evaluate them. I constantly need to remind myself of the log relationship, well done.

  • @VK92KL
    @VK92KL 15 днів тому

    It is wonderful going 15 years in the past with such a great explanation.

  • @johnsampson1096
    @johnsampson1096 Місяць тому +8

    Thanks for your thorough explanations on higher math! Not having a college degree, I took a basic algebra course to enter the electronics field. The instructor was not good at explaining polynomials as I recalled. Hope you have 100000 subscribers soon!

    • @Bunny99s
      @Bunny99s Місяць тому +4

      She already has 600k+ subs on her german channel "Mathematrick" :) But yeah, hopefully her videos gets also popular on the global market. Btw, Susanne also has a metal band called MoonSun. Something between symphonic and power metal. They have done many great covers and have some originals as well. She has an outstanding singing voice.

    • @keithmills778
      @keithmills778 Місяць тому +1

      Did you mean “100000 subscribers” or “10 to the 5th power subscribers”?

    • @johnsampson1096
      @johnsampson1096 Місяць тому +1

      @@keithmills778 100k! Sharp comment.....

  • @selahattinkara-o5h
    @selahattinkara-o5h 9 днів тому +1

    You tell it in a very nice and cheerful way. You are wonderful. I wish you success in your career.👏

  • @Siahh555
    @Siahh555 17 днів тому +1

    Great channel, great material and great content. Thank you for being so detailed and patient.

  • @zemaraibabori1804
    @zemaraibabori1804 12 днів тому

    Many thanks for the tilents and very good manner of solving the maths problems.

  • @marcusmanson4264
    @marcusmanson4264 16 годин тому

    I really love you videos so often in math videos they skip steps as if they are just common know page and end up pulling numbers out their ass but you explain every step and are much easier to follow

  • @mrmane2000
    @mrmane2000 25 днів тому +2

    Love this channel. It's great to revisit these mathematical lessons again after decades. As a bonus, the teacher's cute too. 😂

  • @tonyennis1787
    @tonyennis1787 20 днів тому +3

    For Reasons, I missed this type of math in High School and was expected to know it when at college. I muddled through it by rote. It's nice to have some understanding of it!

    • @herrickinman9303
      @herrickinman9303 7 днів тому

      Since you capitalized _reasons_ and _high school,_ I'm surprised that you didn't also capitalize _college._

    • @tonyennis1787
      @tonyennis1787 7 днів тому

      @@herrickinman9303 wow so insightful!

  • @larbibenmrad1968
    @larbibenmrad1968 29 днів тому +5

    log(2 ; 1/8) = log (1/8) / log2
    = (log1 - log8) / log2 = (0 - log8) / log2 = - log(2^3) / log2 = -3 log2 / log2 = -3
    Thanks Queen !

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому +1

      You've just burned my brain cells lol

    • @larbibenmrad1968
      @larbibenmrad1968 22 дні тому

      @@toby9999
      log(a ; x) = log x / log a

    • @herrickinman9303
      @herrickinman9303 7 днів тому +1

      Since 1/8 = 2^(-3), we have log2 (1/8) = log2 (2^(-3)) = -3.

  • @markdavis9990
    @markdavis9990 11 днів тому

    Thank you. Great teaching manner. I look forward to studying further video lessons.

  • @PirCohen
    @PirCohen 15 днів тому +1

    Excellent presentation, clear, engaging and thorough. Thank you very much.

  • @7ismersenne
    @7ismersenne 15 днів тому

    Thank you for your beautifully clear exposition of these logarithmic examples.

  • @faussie6854
    @faussie6854 17 днів тому

    Your explanation is superb. Thanxs for helping explaining rusty math problem to my kids.

  • @HenkerDissidia
    @HenkerDissidia 27 днів тому +4

    You can evaluate any decimal log mentally in a few seconds, as long as a limited precision is acceptable. Using my method, I can get 3 decimals of precision in 5~10s for the log of any number. Needless to say, if you learn how to calculate logs and antilogs mentally, you will also soon be able to calculate any powers/roots, large multiplications/divisions, base changes, and some simple Taylor expansions (for example for trig) with minimal effort (I can do most of these with errors of 0.1~1% within 20s~1min).
    The starting point is to memorize a short list of logs (similarly to how you memorized the multiplication boards, as a kid). This list consists of the logs of simple numbers (1~9) and the logs of small increments (-10% ~ +10% -- note that the log of small increments is approximately linear, so you can easily eyaball intermediate values!). Then, to calculate the log of any number, all you have to do is decompose it into a simpler number plus a small increment, calculate both logs and add them up. This gives you the fractional part of the log; the integer part you get directly from the magnitude of the number. Yes, it really is that simple...
    ----------------------------------------
    We can do a quick RNG example, so that you can see my method in practice: calculate log(4963)
    1) Ignoring the magnitude, we have 4.963 = 5 - 0.037 ~= 5 - 0.75%
    2) log(5) ~= 0.699; log(-0.75%) ~= -0.0033 --> from here, the fractional part is given by 0.699 - 0.0033 = 0.6957
    3) Looking at the magnitude, 4963 is in the thousands, so the integer part is 3
    --> log(4963) ~= 3.6957 (Real value: 3.695744275....). Pretty accurate and not really rocket science, as you can see!
    ----------------------------------------
    Here is the list of logs I learned by heart. I use 3 decimals because it strikes the sweetspot between accuracy and mental load.
    NOTE 1: I memorize these values without the decimals (for example, log(5) I memorize as 699 instead of 0.699) because it reduces the computational load and makes it easier to avoid mixing up orders of magnitude (for example, I find 0.0043 and 0.043 easier to mix up than 4.3 and 43).
    NOTE 2: Many of the items in this list can be derived directly from each other, like log(4) = 2 * log(2). This means that, at first, you won't even need to memorize the full list -- but this will come at the cost of increasing your mental load. In fact, if you know log(+1%), you can derive all other logs in the list from it with more or less work -- I will let you figure that one out by yourself, but feel free to drop me a comment if you are struggling with some cases.
    2 --> .301 6 --> .778
    3 --> .477 7 --> .845
    4 --> .602 8 --> .903
    5 --> .699 9 --> .954
    -1% --> -.0044 +1% --> +.0043
    -5% --> -.022 +5% --> +.021
    -10% --> -.046 +10% --> +.041

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      That's spectacular

  • @gordonglenn2089
    @gordonglenn2089 29 днів тому +1

    As a fellow math(s) educator, I appreciate the enthusiasm you show for "our" subject! 😃

    • @Potencyfunction
      @Potencyfunction 28 днів тому

      She loves math, that is why. She very pleasant to listen to and she is also an educated person.

  • @clintonsiegle2432
    @clintonsiegle2432 8 днів тому

    I look forward to watching all your videos. I had no idea what log was. And these helped me a lot.

  • @afetita179
    @afetita179 4 дні тому

    very nice & smooth work
    love your teaching style ❤

  • @adb012
    @adb012 Місяць тому +7

    Super-summary:
    "2 to what power is 1/8?
    "Let's see 1/8 = 1/(2^3) = 2^(-3). So the power is -3!!!

  • @viz8746
    @viz8746 Місяць тому +8

    We had to learn this by heart in 8th grade in India - "THE LOGARITHM OF A NUMBER FOR A GIVEN BASE IS THE INDEX TO WHICH THE BASE MUST BE RAISED TO PRODUCE THAT NUMBER" .

    • @ytdlgandalf
      @ytdlgandalf 26 днів тому

      Somehow with caps this makes so much more sense. Nice!

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      I'm still struggling to visualise that

  • @tallperson9422
    @tallperson9422 Місяць тому +2

    Just found your site and subscribed. Love the clarity of your explanations and that you use many examples.

  • @lfoevuf340
    @lfoevuf340 6 днів тому

    10:08 Or you can flip 36 to (1/36)^(-1), move -1 in front of the logarithm and proceed as usual. Thus, we discovered the identity log(a,x) = -log(a,1/x).

  • @qzorn4440
    @qzorn4440 28 днів тому +1

    A wonderful way of explaining logs. 🤸🎉 Thank you Math Queen and season greetings.

  • @davidwalters313
    @davidwalters313 29 днів тому

    Very good video Lester. After a disappointing start you pulled it back nicely. You never give up which is a lesson to us all. Well done

  • @MyPaulocorrea
    @MyPaulocorrea Місяць тому +2

    Uma aula deliciosa de logaritmos! Vc explica muito bem mesmo! Parabéns!

  • @DrinkingStar
    @DrinkingStar 27 днів тому +4

    With all the math you are showing me, I think you should be called the Math goddess instead of the Math Queen.

  • @panaden1811
    @panaden1811 16 днів тому

    Thank you
    Teacher Maths Simplified

  • @DexterHaven
    @DexterHaven 6 днів тому

    4:37 that is shallow rote learning, though; better to see that we only need to factor 27 get 3 cubed; then when we square that we go from three 3's to six 3's; better to see it, so it makes sense first without the rote move. So the question asks what is the exponent of 3 that equals six 3's multiplied together? 6.

  • @boshboshbosh149
    @boshboshbosh149 2 дні тому

    You showed me how to solve my life problems not only math ❤

  • @PaulBourret
    @PaulBourret Місяць тому +1

    Thanks for this refresher. It has been a long time since I played with logs!

  • @merkulus-n5v
    @merkulus-n5v Місяць тому +3

    Another great review. Thank you!

  • @N4505
    @N4505 24 дні тому

    I'm loving your videos, the youtube algorithm did it again!

  • @dijonstreak
    @dijonstreak 29 днів тому

    AWESOME job teach !! best ever simple and very well clarified...many thanks...for a GREAT job !!

  • @hunterofendermen367
    @hunterofendermen367 14 днів тому

    Thank you so much for this tutorial, bc I never knew you could do logarithms by hand. Any math class I had that involves logarithm calculations, the math teacher said there is no shorthand to logs and they must be down by calculator, sooo that definitely says a lot about America tbh

  • @joewhitfield6316
    @joewhitfield6316 5 днів тому

    You're totally amazing. Thanks!

  • @abcschool.6586
    @abcschool.6586 День тому

    Thanks a lot .
    Very interesting.
    Good luck

  • @phoebewei4770
    @phoebewei4770 Місяць тому +1

    Really appreciate your teachings

    • @monroeclewis1973
      @monroeclewis1973 19 днів тому

      If only my math teachers in middle and high school were half as good as you math would not have been the bitter, unpleasant experience it was. Instead it was left to me to teach myself, a challenge I accepted and eventually overcame with A grades in College Algebra and Calculus. Your kind, crystal clear presentations are a joy and a delight. They remind me gifted teachers can make subjects we find daunting understandable. Please keep up the good work.

  • @cassiuscramos
    @cassiuscramos 17 днів тому

    You have great teaching skills and selected very good examples.
    I just think the negative log example should've been the last one, because it is the trickiest to "imagine". Negative power is something not very natural to most people.

  • @DexterHaven
    @DexterHaven 6 днів тому

    8:39 how is it "always a 10"? In computer science it might be a 2 by convention or a 16, which are more common for machine language applications. In engineering it may be base e, called the 'natural log' (Euler).

  • @DrinkingStar
    @DrinkingStar 11 днів тому

    This is math that I never learned. A giant THANKS and 2 Thumbs Up for this revelation. P.S. I hope you do some videos on statistics. To me, this was the most poorly math taught.

  • @HolySoliDeoGloria
    @HolySoliDeoGloria 28 днів тому +1

    8:19 In speech, "logarithm" by itself (no base specified) is often taken by mathematicians to refer to the natural logarithm (base e). But Susanne is of course correct to say that "log," when written without a base, is almost always understood to imply the base-10 logarithm.

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      So, is that why ln is used for base e?

  • @terencewright2223
    @terencewright2223 Місяць тому

    A great way of understanding logarithms

  • @MukagasarabweCharlotte
    @MukagasarabweCharlotte 20 днів тому

    Thank you so much for your assistance

  • @AbrhamShitahun
    @AbrhamShitahun 27 днів тому

    Just l am surprising on your calculations !!! Wow so amazing !!
    I like it.

  • @masoud6726
    @masoud6726 24 дні тому

    Perfect explanation. Thanks

  • @P6009D
    @P6009D 9 днів тому

    This channel is going to be big.

  • @Gnowop3
    @Gnowop3 23 дні тому +1

    Mental arithmetic! 1/8 = 2 ^-3 Answer =-3 by definition

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      Wow, I would never have thought of that. I tend to think of logs as mysterious values with no intuitive interpretation.

  • @rolandmichels1
    @rolandmichels1 19 днів тому

    Hi Suzanna, Roland from Venray, NL here. I've seen some of your video's the last couple of days. Before I saw comparable videos of, primarily (BTW brilliant) Indian guys, but, although the steps they followed were correct, I missed the 'whys' and 'whens', whereas you explain in an almost childish manner (not an offence; a compliment!!!) how to solve such problems. Chapeau! (If you're not familiar with French: Hats off!)

    • @MathQueenSusanne
      @MathQueenSusanne  19 днів тому

      Hi Roland, thank you so much for your kind words! We actually learn French at school in Germany and this is me 11 years ago: ua-cam.com/video/XqBy8ftwCcM/v-deo.htmlsi=nD-yVSsAC6iEv5ou

    • @rolandmichels1
      @rolandmichels1 18 днів тому

      @MathQueenSusanne Also kann ich auch auf Deutsch mit dir reden. Werde ich aber nicht mehr tun, weil viele anderen Leute es nicht verstehen würden. Übrigens: Schone stimme und auch noch piano-fähig! Großartig!

    • @rolandmichels1
      @rolandmichels1 18 днів тому

      *Stimme

  • @P6009D
    @P6009D 9 днів тому

    My math book said: log (2) 16 = 4 because 16 = 2 raised to the 4th power. That was it, no further explanation. I have an easy time understanding math, but I have an even easier time with your explanation.

  • @robinbeckford
    @robinbeckford Місяць тому

    Thanks. A good refresher for me.

  • @misterbonzoid5623
    @misterbonzoid5623 28 днів тому +3

    0:50 'How often have we multiplied the four by itself?' The answer is one time.

    • @mjowsey
      @mjowsey 27 днів тому +1

      Should say how many terms in the multiplication

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      Only if you're being overly pedentic.

    • @mjowsey
      @mjowsey 22 дні тому

      @toby9999 yeah, maths is no place for accuracy!

  • @paulchoudhury2573
    @paulchoudhury2573 25 днів тому

    She is the Algebra teacher from our dreams.

  • @MeinhartKöster
    @MeinhartKöster 22 дні тому

    danke, susanne, klasse erklärt

  • @BluesChoker01
    @BluesChoker01 23 дні тому +1

    2^x = 1/8
    2^x = 2^-3 change bases to same value
    x = -3 the only difference is now in the exponents

  • @dhm7815
    @dhm7815 4 дні тому

    I needed this.

  • @BillSmith3546
    @BillSmith3546 9 днів тому

    Reminds me of my favorite math teacher...

  • @n7565j
    @n7565j 2 дні тому

    While I LOVE your videos, I must admit, everything after "Hello my lovelies" was WAAYYYY above my paygrade ;-)
    Although I do hope something you said will creep into my feeble mind!!!

  • @abrarhussain6244
    @abrarhussain6244 3 дні тому

    I think changing from logarithmic to exponential form could have been a better approach.
    log1/6(36)=x
    36= (1/6)^x
    6^2= 6^-x
    2=-x
    x=-2

  • @ShiiMayoyo7230
    @ShiiMayoyo7230 5 днів тому

    Thank you very much, I really suffered at the hands of logs😂its payback time🎉

  • @markprice1984
    @markprice1984 29 днів тому +2

    I like being referred to as "lovely". Doing math is the bonus.

  • @Constitutionalist52
    @Constitutionalist52 Місяць тому +6

    Click like if you’ve ever had to use this type of math in your life so far apart from school lessons .

    • @marlberg2963
      @marlberg2963 24 дні тому +1

      Every Damn Day. Such is the life of a data architect

    • @wheechie
      @wheechie 21 день тому

      Yup, data analyst here

    • @marlberg2963
      @marlberg2963 20 днів тому

      @wheechie Microslop didn't make it any easier with their choice of integer basis for universe date either. Who da phuq has 1900-01-01 at midnight as their universe date?

  • @faysalmaxamud5519
    @faysalmaxamud5519 29 днів тому +1

    Thanks that was great

  • @archimedesfernandes
    @archimedesfernandes 24 дні тому

    Great explanation

  • @janjager2906
    @janjager2906 14 днів тому

    That was awsome!

  • @BN-hy1nd
    @BN-hy1nd Місяць тому

    Thanks for that. I did not know these shortcuts. 👍🏿

  • @daniellerosalie2155
    @daniellerosalie2155 Місяць тому +1

    Dankeschoen! Ich mag math.

  • @eltayebeltayeb1568
    @eltayebeltayeb1568 20 днів тому

    Very interesting video 😊

  • @kkb92-96x
    @kkb92-96x 8 днів тому

    Thanks. How about for the numbers that don't multiply into the numbers. Let us say log(9) or log(27) or log3(10)? Is there a way?

  • @kenmore01
    @kenmore01 23 дні тому

    Nice video and great examples increasing in difficulty, but i was waiting for when the answer didn't round out so nicely. It didnt come. For example, what if the last one was Log 2/3 of 16/80?

  • @kevincozens6837
    @kevincozens6837 27 днів тому

    For the cases where you had a log of 1/n that is the same as n to the power of -1. You move the -1 to the front then you have negative log of n. It skips that expansion you did where you wind up with a term of 0. You can use that same identity when dealing with a fractional base. EDIT: The other way to do logs without a calculator is to use a slide rule. :)

  • @BogdanTestsSoftware
    @BogdanTestsSoftware 15 днів тому

    So how about log3(4) or log7(11)? And loge(10), where e=sum(1/n) n=1 -> infinity

  • @wayneyadams
    @wayneyadams 28 днів тому

    The reason any base to the power of zero is one which means log 1 = 0 for any base, can be shown like this.
    Division requires exponents be subtracted.
    n^x/n^x = 1
    n^x/n^x = n^(x-x) = n^0
    So, n^0 = 1
    It is a provable fact and does not rely on the old, "we define it that way.

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому

      How about when n=0? I think this is a strange one, right?

  • @robert.ehrlich8942
    @robert.ehrlich8942 Місяць тому +1

    You say "we have to count how often we have mutiplied ..." but the relevant number here is not the number of multiplications but the number of factors, which is the number of multiplications plus one.

    • @SchmartMaker
      @SchmartMaker 29 днів тому +1

      Exactly! I noticed this as well. While the intention of that phrase was fairly clear, I think the wording could’ve been more precise.

  • @gregoryt1139
    @gregoryt1139 2 дні тому

    I had a "nightmare" teacher who would make up the test questions, off the top of his head, at the beginning of class. You might get craziness like, log 0.003 or log 11. The book had nice, neat answers, like yours. His could be some horrifying fraction, or even no solution, at all. A couple of times, even he said, "Ooh, this was a bad question," as he struggled to solve it. His motto was: Use your tools; Work the problem.

  • @rolansmith9951
    @rolansmith9951 19 днів тому

    I drop logs 🪵 in the pan usually 3 logs a day x 16 sheets to wipe my bottom how many sheets where logged out

  • @DominickAngelo
    @DominickAngelo Місяць тому +1

    Suzanna, please do more logarithms.

  • @tonyennis1787
    @tonyennis1787 20 днів тому

    What do we do when the numbers are not so nice, such as log (base 10) 1100
    If'ns I was to guess, I'd say we factor the 1100 into 1000 * 1.1 so log(1000)+log(1.1), then treat log(1.1) as log(11/10) ? But with the method shown, log(11/10) = log(1)...

  • @CZRkg
    @CZRkg 21 день тому

    In programming, logs without base always mean base 2 due to the binary nature of computer architecture.

  • @Myndale
    @Myndale 27 днів тому

    With base 10 all you have to remember is log(2)=~0.3, log(3)=~0.48 and log(7)~=0.85. All the others are either trivial or combinations of those 3:
    log(1) = 0, easy to remember as is log(10) = 1
    log(4) = log(2 * 2) = 0.3 + 0.3 = 0.6
    log(5) = log(10 / 2) = 1 - 0.3 = 0.7
    log(6) = log(2 * 3) = 0.3 + 0.48 = 0.78
    log(8) = log(2 * 2 * 2) = 0.3 + 0.3 + 0.3 = 0.9
    log(9) = log(3 * 3) = 0.48 * 0.48 = 0.96
    With that you can raise any number to any power (or find any root of any number) with surprising accuracy by reducing the number to the 0-1 range (keeping the exponent in mind), using basic linear interpolation between the known values in that range to get the log of your base, dividing or multiplying by the power/index and then repeating the process in reverse to find the inverse log, which in turn gives you your final answer. Requires a bit of practice, but can certainly be done in your head if you have some basic math skills.

    • @toby9999
      @toby9999 22 дні тому +1

      That blows my mind... really?
      It seems to work, but I can feel my brain exploding. It's baffling how that can work.

  • @xxz4655
    @xxz4655 23 дні тому

    4:44 this is probably a stupid question but instead of moving the power of 2 to the front of the Log why not just operate 27^2 and then resolve the logarithm

    • @BrianB14471
      @BrianB14471 7 днів тому +1

      You could, but that is usually harder than just multiplying by the exponent.

  • @larbibenmrad1968
    @larbibenmrad1968 29 днів тому

    hhhhhhhhh
    good method
    and here is another method
    log ( 2/3 ; 16/81) = log( 16/81) / log (2/3) = log ( 2^4 /3^4) /log( 2/3)
    = log ((2/3)^4)) / log(2/3 ) = (4 log(2/3)) / log(2/3) = 4
    ps : c'est une très bonne méthode pour expliquer le calcul des logarithmes
    mais il ne faut pas oublier que seuls 3 logarithmes sont les plus utilisés
    1- log (10 ; x ) = log x .........( la notation admise
    2- log ( e ; x ) = Ln x = Log x ........( la notation admise
    3- log (2 ; x ) = log (2 ; x) .........( la notation admise

  • @josipmarks9658
    @josipmarks9658 Місяць тому

    I like how you teach

  • @TheLucanicLord
    @TheLucanicLord 29 днів тому

    In some contexts they write log when they mean ln. Its use is deprecated by ISO, but who listens to them?