The Natural Logarithm

What you will be able to do

The learner can evaluate and interpret ln ⁡ x as the area under 1 / t , derive the product and power laws from that definition, differentiate and integrate expressions involving ln , convert between bases, and identify where the laws fail or change a domain.

Orientation

The antiderivative of 1/x, which the power rule cannot produce

The power rule for integration handles every exponent but one:

∫ t n d t = t n + 1 n + 1 + C , n ≠ − 1 .

At n = − 1 the formula divides by zero. Yet nothing is wrong with the function 1 / t or with the area beneath it: on [ 1 , 2 ] that area is a perfectly definite number, close to 0.693147 . There is simply no power of t whose derivative is 1 / t , so the antiderivative cannot be written with the functions available so far.

The response is to stop searching and make a definition:

ln ⁡ x = ∫ 1 x d t t , x > 0 .

This can feel like naming a difficulty rather than solving it. It is not, and the reason matters: each ln ⁡ x is a specific number, computable to any accuracy by the methods of the integration unit, and every property of the function can now be derived rather than assumed.

What comes out of it. Three things, none of them assumed in advance.

The product law is geometry. Splitting ∫ 1 a b at a and rescaling the second piece shows ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b . The property that made logarithms worth inventing, turning multiplication into addition, is a fact about this area. Checked: ln ⁡ 6 = 1.791759469228 and ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 3 = 1.791759469228 .

The number e is located, not chosen. The area grows steadily as the upper limit moves right, so at exactly one point it equals 1. That point is e , found by bisection to be 2.718281828459 . Nothing was picked; e was discovered as the answer to "where does the area reach 1?"

The exponential comes last. ln is strictly increasing, so it has an inverse, and that inverse is e x . This reverses the familiar order, usually e x comes first and ln is its inverse, but the familiar order must assume what e is and what e x means for irrational x . Here both are supplied.

Where this function already appears. The integration-techniques unit produces ln ⁡ | u | constantly from substitutions and partial fractions; the functions unit gives ln ⁡ g ( x ) the domain condition g ( x ) > 0 ; l'Hôpital's rule uses ln to handle indeterminate powers. All of that rests on the definition given here.

Why this matters

Why define a function by an integral at all

Defining a function as an area looks like a retreat. Why not define ln as the inverse of e x , the way it is usually first met?

Because that route has a gap in it. To define ln as the inverse of e x , one must first know what e x means. For integer exponents e 3 = e ⋅ e ⋅ e is clear, and rational exponents follow through roots. But e 2 is not a product of anything, and the usual account, "take a limit of rational exponents", needs the very machinery of limits and continuity that the logarithm is often used to develop. It also needs e itself to have been produced from somewhere, and the usual source is lim ( 1 + 1 / n ) n , which converges so slowly it gives 2.718280469096 only after a million terms.

The integral route has no such gap. The area under 1 / t exists for every x > 0 because 1 / t is continuous there, and the fundamental theorem does the rest.

What the definition supplies, in order.

StepObtained fromRequires no prior notion of
ln ⁡ x exists for all x > 0 continuity of 1 / t exponentials
d d x ln ⁡ x = 1 / x fundamental theoremlimits of rational powers
ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b splitting and rescaling the integralany law of exponents
e with ln ⁡ e = 1 monotonicity and the intermediate value theorem e being given in advance
e x for every real x inverse of ln irrational exponents

Each row uses only what is above it. In particular e 2 is now unproblematic: it is the number whose logarithm is 2 , and no limit of rational powers is needed to say what it means.

The general pattern. Defining a function by an integral is standard practice whenever the object wanted has no elementary closed form. The error function erf ⁡ ( x ) = 2 π ∫ 0 x e − t 2 d t is defined this way for exactly the reason the series unit gives, e − t 2 has no elementary antiderivative, and so is the logarithmic integral used in number theory. A definition of this kind is not an admission of defeat; it specifies a number for each input and permits every subsequent property to be proved.

The cost. Values are not obvious by inspection. ln ⁡ 2 is not a familiar constant the way 2 is; it is 0.693147180560 , obtained by computing an area. And the series ln ⁡ ( 1 + u ) = u − u 2 2 + u 3 3 − ⋯ that could supply values converges only for − 1 < u ≤ 1 , uselessly slowly at the endpoint: 10000 terms of the alternating harmonic series give 0.6930971831 against ln ⁡ 2 = 0.6931471806 , still wrong in the fifth decimal.

So the definition is excellent for proving things and poor for computing them, which is why the laws derived from it matter so much, since they reduce awkward logarithms to combinations of a few known values.

Definition

Sign, domain, and what the definition does not assume

The lower limit is 1, and that choice fixes everything. Starting the integral at 1 makes ln ⁡ 1 = 0 , since an integral over an empty interval vanishes. Any other starting point would shift the whole function by a constant and break the product law, ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b at a = b = 1 forces ln ⁡ 1 = 2 ln ⁡ 1 , hence ln ⁡ 1 = 0 . So the lower limit is not a convention but the only choice compatible with the law.

The sign comes from orientation, not from the integrand. For x > 1 the integral runs left to right over a positive integrand, so ln ⁡ x > 0 . For 0 < x < 1 the limits are reversed, and ∫ 1 x = − ∫ x 1 , so ln ⁡ x < 0 . The integrand 1 / t is positive throughout; the negative values of ln come entirely from the direction of travel.

Checked: ln ⁡ 2 = + 0.693147180560 and ln ⁡ 0.5 = − 0.693147180560 , equal in size, opposite in sign, which is the quotient law at ln ⁡ ( 1 / 2 ) = − ln ⁡ 2 .

Why the domain is x > 0 , exactly. The integrand has a singularity at t = 0 . For x > 0 the path from 1 to x stays within ( 0 , ∞ ) and never meets it. For x < 0 the path would have to cross t = 0 , where 1 / t is unbounded and the integral does not exist. That is the source of the condition g ( x ) > 0 the functions unit imposes on ln ⁡ g ( x ) . A domain restriction inherited from an integral, not an arbitrary rule.

Note the related but different statement ∫ d u u = ln ⁡ | u | + C . The absolute value is legitimate because on an interval of negative numbers d d u ln ⁡ ( − u ) = − 1 − u = 1 u as well. But this holds on any interval not containing 0; an integral spanning 0 still fails to exist. Verified: ∫ − 2 − 1 d t t = − 0.693147180560 , matching ln ⁡ | − 1 | − ln ⁡ | − 2 | = 0 − ln ⁡ 2 .

What is deliberately not assumed. The definition mentions no exponential, no base, and no value of e . That is the point of the ordering: e is defined after ln , as the solution of ln ⁡ x = 1 , and e x after that, as the inverse function. Reading the definition as "the logarithm to base e " inverts the logic and smuggles in the thing being constructed.

The strict increase that makes the inverse exist is itself a consequence: d d x ln ⁡ x = 1 x > 0 for all x > 0 . Verified numerically at x = 0.5 , 1 , 2 , 5 , 10 , where the central difference gives 2.0 , 1.0 , 0.5 , 0.2 , 0.1 to ten decimals.

Figure

The logarithm is the area under 1/t

The area from 1 to e under 1/t, which is exactly 1

ln ⁡ x is defined as ∫ 1 x d t t , and the shaded strip is that area for x = e , where it equals exactly 1.

Two things the picture does settle. The area starts at t = 1 , so ln ⁡ 1 = 0 : an empty interval has no area. And for x > 1 the strip lies to the right of the start and counts positively, so ln is increasing there: each extra bit of x adds a positive sliver of area, of height 1 / x .

The sign below 1 follows from the same definition rather than from the drawing: for x < 1 the interval runs backwards, ∫ 1 x = − ∫ x 1 , so ln ⁡ x is negative. That is an orientation convention made visible only if you draw the second interval, which this figure does not.

The product law and the unboundedness of ln are established in the derivation and theorem blocks that follow. Neither is readable off this strip: a curve approaching the axis may enclose finite or infinite area, and which one happens for 1 / t takes an argument, not a glance.

Derivation

Deriving the product and power laws from the integral

The product law. Claim: for a , b > 0 , ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b .

Start from the definition and split the interval at a :

ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ∫ 1 a b d t t = ∫ 1 a d t t + ∫ a a b d t t = ln ⁡ a + ∫ a a b d t t .

The claim reduces to showing the second piece equals ln ⁡ b , that the area from a to a b is the same as the area from 1 to b .

The rescaling. Substitute t = a u , so d t = a d u , and the limits t = a , a b become u = 1 , b :

∫ a a b d t t = ∫ 1 b a d u a u = ∫ 1 b d u u = ln ⁡ b .

The factor a cancels exactly, appearing once from d t and once in the denominator. Hence

ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b . ◼

What made it work. Only 1 / t has this property. Stretching the interval by a factor a multiplies its width by a and divides the height by a , so the area is unchanged. For any other power the two factors would not cancel: under t = a u , t n picks up a n + 1 , which is 1 only when n = − 1 . The product law is a property of the reciprocal, not of areas in general, which is why exactly one power lacks an elementary antiderivative and exactly one gives a function converting products to sums.

Verified: ln ⁡ 6 = 1.791759469228 against ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 3 = 1.791759469228 ; ln ⁡ 8 = 2.079441541680 against ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 4 = 2.079441541680 ; ln ⁡ 35 = 3.555348061489 against ln ⁡ 5 + ln ⁡ 7 = 3.555348061489 ; and ln ⁡ 4 = 1.386294361120 against ln ⁡ 0.5 + ln ⁡ 8 = 1.386294361120 , which covers a case with one argument below 1.

The quotient law follows. Applying the product law to b ⋅ a b = a gives ln ⁡ b + ln ⁡ a b = ln ⁡ a , so ln ⁡ a b = ln ⁡ a − ln ⁡ b . With a = 1 : ln ⁡ 1 b = − ln ⁡ b , which is why ln ⁡ 0.5 = − ln ⁡ 2 exactly.

The power law, for integers first. Repeated use of the product law gives

ln ⁡ ( a n ) = ln ⁡ a + ⋯ + ln ⁡ a ⏟ n = n ln ⁡ a

for positive integers n . Verified: ln ⁡ ( 2 n ) against n ln ⁡ 2 at n = 1 , 2 , 4 , 8 , 10 , 0.693147180560 , 1.386294361120 , 2.772588722240 , 5.545177444480 , 6.931471805599 , matching in every digit shown.

The power law for all real r , which repeated multiplication cannot reach, comes from calculus instead. Fix r and differentiate ln ⁡ ( x r ) by the chain rule:

d d x ln ⁡ ( x r ) = 1 x r ⋅ r x r − 1 = r x = d d x ( r ln ⁡ x ) .

Two functions with the same derivative on an interval differ by a constant, and at x = 1 both are zero, so the constant is zero and ln ⁡ ( x r ) = r ln ⁡ x for every real r . This is the step that makes ln ⁡ ( 2 2 ) = 2 ln ⁡ 2 meaningful.

Locating e . Since ln is continuous with ln ⁡ 1 = 0 , and ln ⁡ ( 2 n ) = n ln ⁡ 2 grows without bound, the intermediate value theorem gives exactly one x with ln ⁡ x = 1 . Bisecting on the condition ∫ 1 x d t / t = 1 yields

e = 2.718281828459 ,

agreeing with the known value to all twelve places shown. Strict monotonicity makes it unique, so e is the output of a search, not a choice.

Theorem

The logarithm as a bijection onto the reals

Theorem. ln : ( 0 , ∞ ) → R is strictly increasing, continuous, and onto. Consequently it has an inverse defined on all of R , denoted exp or e x , satisfying ln ⁡ ( e x ) = x for every real x and e ln ⁡ x = x for every x > 0 .

Strictly increasing. By the fundamental theorem, d d x ln ⁡ x = 1 x , which is positive for every x > 0 . A function with positive derivative on an interval is strictly increasing there.

Verified numerically: central differences give 2.0 , 1.0 , 0.5 , 0.2 , 0.1 at x = 0.5 , 1 , 2 , 5 , 10 , matching 1 / x to within 2 × 10 − 10 .

Continuous. Differentiability implies continuity.

Unbounded above. The power law gives ln ⁡ ( 2 n ) = n ln ⁡ 2 , and ln ⁡ 2 = 0.693147180560 > 0 , so choosing n large makes ln ⁡ ( 2 n ) exceed any bound.

Unbounded below. ln ⁡ 1 2 n = − n ln ⁡ 2 → − ∞ by the quotient law.

Onto. Being continuous and taking arbitrarily large and arbitrarily negative values, ln attains every real value in between, by the intermediate value theorem. Strict increase makes the attainment unique, so the function is a bijection and the inverse exists.

Verified: ln ⁡ ( e x ) = x and e ln ⁡ x = x at x = 0.5 , 1 , 2 , 5 , exact to twelve places in every case.

Corollary (the definition of e ). Since 1 is a real number, exactly one x satisfies ln ⁡ x = 1 . That number is e = 2.718281828459 , recovered here by bisecting on the area condition rather than by quoting it.

Corollary (all logarithms are multiples of this one). For b > 0 , b ≠ 1 , define log b ⁡ x as the solution y of b y = x . Taking ln of both sides and using the power law, y ln ⁡ b = ln ⁡ x , so

log b ⁡ x = ln ⁡ x ln ⁡ b .

Verified: log 10 ⁡ 1000 = 3 , log 2 ⁡ 1024 = 10 , log 3 ⁡ 81 = 4 , each matching ln ⁡ x / ln ⁡ b to twelve places. So there is only one logarithm up to a constant factor, and the "natural" one is the choice making the derivative exactly 1 / x rather than 1 x ln ⁡ b .

Corollary (exponentials for irrational powers). For a > 0 and any real r , define a r = e r ln ⁡ a . This is consistent with repeated multiplication when r is an integer and supplies a meaning when r is irrational, filling the gap the motivation block identifies in the usual order of development.

Growth, and a caution. ln ⁡ x → ∞ , but slowly:

x ln ⁡ x
10 2.302585
100 4.605170
10 6 13.815511
10 12 27.631021
10 100 230.258509

Each hundredfold increase in x adds only about 4.6 . For ln ⁡ x to exceed 100 requires x > e 100 ≈ 2.688 × 10 43 . So unboundedness and slow growth are compatible. The same lesson the harmonic series teaches in the sequences unit, and for a closely related reason, since H n tracks ln ⁡ n .

Procedure

Working with logarithms

To differentiate an expression containing ln .

Step 1 — Simplify with the laws first. Converting ln ⁡ x 2 x + 1 x − 3 into 2 ln ⁡ x + 1 2 ln ⁡ ( x + 1 ) − ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) turns one messy chain-rule problem into three easy ones. Do this before differentiating, not after.

Step 2 — Apply the chain rule. For a composite,

d d x ln ⁡ u ( x ) = u ′ ( x ) u ( x ) .

The derivative of a logarithm is the derivative of the inside over the inside.

Step 3 — Use logarithmic differentiation where it helps. For a product or quotient of many factors, or for a variable base with a variable exponent such as x x , take ln of both sides, differentiate implicitly, then multiply back by y . This is the only elementary route to d d x x x = x x ( 1 + ln ⁡ x ) .

To integrate.

Step 4 — Recognise the pattern u ′ u . Whenever the numerator is the derivative of the denominator,

∫ u ′ u d x = ln ⁡ | u | + C .

Keep the absolute value: it is what makes the result valid on intervals where u < 0 . Check the interval does not contain a zero of u ; if it does, the integral does not exist.

To evaluate or estimate a logarithm.

Step 5 — Reduce to known values with the laws. ln ⁡ 12 = ln ⁡ ( 4 ⋅ 3 ) = 2 ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 3 . Working from ln ⁡ 2 = 0.693147180560 and ln ⁡ 3 = 1.098612288668 gives 2.484906649788 , and ln ⁡ 12 is indeed.

Step 6 — Convert bases when needed with log b ⁡ x = ln ⁡ x ln ⁡ b .

To solve an equation containing logarithms.

Step 7 — Record the domain before doing any algebra. Every ln ⁡ g ( x ) in the original equation requires g ( x ) > 0 , and these conditions are the equation's domain.

Step 8 — Combine into a single logarithm, then exponentiate. Use the laws to reach the form ln ⁡ A = ln ⁡ B or ln ⁡ A = c , then apply e ( ⋅ ) to both sides.

Step 9 — Check every candidate against the domain recorded in step 7. Combining logarithms enlarges the domain, so the algebra can produce roots the original equation excludes. Without it the answer is wrong.

Where it goes wrong.

  • Splitting ln ⁡ ( a + b ) . There is no such law. The laws convert products to sums, never sums to anything.
  • Dropping the absolute value in ∫ d u u , which silently restricts the result to positive u .
  • Skipping the domain check after combining logarithms. The error the functions unit illustrates with ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) = ln ⁡ 10 , whose algebra yields x = 5 and x = − 2 though only x = 5 lies in the domain x > 3 .
  • Treating ln ⁡ x as bounded because it grows slowly. It exceeds every bound eventually, just very late: ln ⁡ x > 100 needs x > 2.688 × 10 43 .
  • Using the series ln ⁡ ( 1 + u ) = u − u 2 2 + ⋯ outside − 1 < u ≤ 1 , where it diverges, or at u = 1 for computation, where 10000 terms still give only 0.6930971831 against 0.6931471806 .
  • Applying a law with a non-positive argument. ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b needs a > 0 and b > 0 separately; with a = b = − 2 the left side is ln ⁡ 4 and the right side is undefined.

Worked example

Solving a logarithmic equation with a domain check

Problem. Solve ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) = ln ⁡ 10 .

Step 7 — Record the domain first. The equation contains ln ⁡ x and ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) , so it requires

x > 0 and x − 3 > 0 .

The second is stricter, so the domain is x > 3 . Writing this down before any algebra is what makes the final check possible. Once the logarithms are combined, the original restrictions are no longer visible.

Step 8 — Combine and exponentiate. By the product law, valid here because both arguments are positive on the domain,

ln ⁡ ( x ( x − 3 ) ) = ln ⁡ 10 .

Since ln is injective, being strictly increasing by the theorem block, equal logarithms force equal arguments:

x ( x − 3 ) = 10 ⟹ x 2 − 3 x − 10 = 0 ⟹ ( x − 5 ) ( x + 2 ) = 0 ,

giving the candidates x = 5 and x = − 2 .

Step 9 — Check both against the domain.

CandidateIn x > 3 ?Verdict
x = 5 yesvalid
x = − 2 norejected

At x = − 2 the original equation reads ln ⁡ ( − 2 ) + ln ⁡ ( − 5 ) , and neither term exists. The root is an artefact of the algebra, not a solution.

Why the algebra produced it. The step from ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) to ln ⁡ ( x ( x − 3 ) ) is valid only where both original logarithms are defined, that is on x > 3 . But the combined form ln ⁡ ( x ( x − 3 ) ) is defined wherever the product is positive, which includes x < 0 , since two negatives multiply to a positive. The manipulation quietly enlarged the domain, and the extra root came from the enlargement rather than from the equation.

This is the same phenomenon the functions unit describes, and the reason step 7 exists.

Verify the surviving root. At x = 5 :

ln ⁡ 5 + ln ⁡ 2 = 1.609437912434 + 0.693147180560 = 2.302585092994 ,

and ln ⁡ 10 = 2.302585092994 . Both sides agree to twelve decimal places, and 5 ( 5 − 3 ) = 10 confirms the product directly.

x = 5

---

A second part: differentiate y = ln ⁡ x 2 x + 1 x − 3 for x > 3 .

Step 1 — Simplify with the laws before differentiating.

y = 2 ln ⁡ x + 1 2 ln ⁡ ( x + 1 ) − ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) .

The quotient became a subtraction, the product a sum, and the square root a coefficient of 1 2 , all by the laws derived from the area.

Step 2 — Differentiate term by term, each by the chain rule d d x ln ⁡ u = u ′ u :

y ′ = 2 x + 1 2 ( x + 1 ) − 1 x − 3 .

Differentiating the original form directly would require the quotient rule, the product rule and the chain rule together, on a fraction containing a square root. Simplifying first replaced all of that with three elementary derivatives, which is why step 1 of the procedure comes first.

Check at x = 4 . The simplified expression gives 2 4 + 1 10 − 1 1 = 0.5 + 0.1 − 1 = − 0.4 . Differentiating the original numerically at x = 4 gives − 0.400000 , agreeing.

Example

Areas, laws and a series, computed

1. The definition, evaluated numerically. Computing ∫ 1 x d t t by Simpson's rule and comparing with the known logarithm:

x Area ∫ 1 x d t / t ln ⁡ x Difference
1 0.000000000000 0.000000000000 0
2 0.693147180560 0.693147180560 2.2 × 10 − 16
e 1.000000000000 1.000000000000 1.1 × 10 − 16
3 1.098612288668 1.098612288668 5.1 × 10 − 15
4 1.386294361120 1.386294361120 5.8 × 10 − 15
8 2.079441541680 2.079441541680 1.8 × 10 − 15
0.5 − 0.693147180560 − 0.693147180560 2.2 × 10 − 16

The definition is not a formal gesture: it computes. Note the row at x = 0.5 , where the area is negative because the limits run backwards, and the row at x = e , where the area is exactly 1, that row is the definition of e .

2. The laws, checked. ln ⁡ 4 = 1.386294361120 and ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 2 = 1.386294361120 ; ln ⁡ 35 = 3.555348061489 and ln ⁡ 5 + ln ⁡ 7 = 3.555348061489 ; ln ⁡ 4 = 1.386294361120 and ln ⁡ 0.5 + ln ⁡ 8 = 1.386294361120 , this last mixing a negative logarithm with a positive one.

The power law across several exponents:

n ln ⁡ ( 2 n ) n ln ⁡ 2
1 0.693147180560 0.693147180560
2 1.386294361120 1.386294361120
4 2.772588722240 2.772588722240
8 5.545177444480 5.545177444480
10 6.931471805599 6.931471805599

This is what "turns multiplication into addition" means concretely: computing ln ⁡ ( 2 10 ) needs one multiplication rather than ten.

3. Change of base. log 10 ⁡ 1000 = 3 , log 2 ⁡ 1024 = 10 , log 3 ⁡ 81 = 4 . Each equal to ln ⁡ x / ln ⁡ b to twelve decimals. Every logarithm is this one, rescaled.

4. The series, and where it fails. For | u | < 1 ,

ln ⁡ ( 1 + u ) = u − u 2 2 + u 3 3 − u 4 4 + ⋯

At u = 0.5 , converging to ln ⁡ 1.5 = 0.405465108108 :

TermsValueError
4 0.401041666667 4.42 × 10 − 3
8 0.405315290179 1.50 × 10 − 4
16 0.405464803171 3.05 × 10 − 7
32 0.405465108106 2.38 × 10 − 12

At u = 0.1 , converging to ln ⁡ 1.1 = 0.095310179804 , just 8 terms give 0.095310179702 , error 1.0 × 10 − 10 , and 16 terms reach the limit of double precision. Smaller u converges dramatically faster.

At the boundary u = 1 it becomes the alternating harmonic series, converging to ln ⁡ 2 so slowly as to be useless:

TermsValueError
10 0.6456349206 4.75 × 10 − 2
100 0.6881721793 4.98 × 10 − 3
1000 0.6926474306 5.00 × 10 − 4
10000 0.6930971831 5.00 × 10 − 5

Ten thousand terms and still wrong in the fifth decimal. Each tenfold increase in work buys one digit. Compare 32 terms at u = 0.5 giving twelve correct digits. The contrast is the interval of convergence at work: the series converges for − 1 < u ≤ 1 , but at the endpoint only barely, which is why practical computation reduces the argument with the laws first rather than using the series directly.

5. Slow growth. ln ⁡ 10 = 2.302585 , ln ⁡ 10 6 = 13.815511 , ln ⁡ 10 12 = 27.631021 , ln ⁡ 10 100 = 230.258509 . Each factor of 10 6 adds about 13.8 . The function is unbounded, yet reaching 100 requires x > 2.688 × 10 43 .

Warning

There is no law for the logarithm of a sum

The laws convert products into sums. Reading them backwards, as though ln distributed over addition, produces the most common error in the subject:

ln ⁡ ( a + b ) ≠ ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b .

A single counterexample settles it. Take a = b = 2 :

ln ⁡ ( 2 + 2 ) = ln ⁡ 4 = 1.386294361120 ,

while

ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 2 = 0.693147180560 + 0.693147180560 = 1.386294361120 .

These happen to agree, because 2 + 2 = 2 × 2 , a coincidence peculiar to 2. Take a = 1 , b = 3 instead:

ln ⁡ ( 1 + 3 ) = ln ⁡ 4 = 1.386294361120 , ln ⁡ 1 + ln ⁡ 3 = 0 + 1.098612288668 = 1.098612288668 .

Different. The correct statement about ln ⁡ 4 is ln ⁡ ( 2 × 2 ) = ln ⁡ 2 + ln ⁡ 2 , using the product rather than the sum.

Why the error is tempting. ln is written like a function applied to an expression, and many operations do distribute: does not, but d d x does, and 2 ( a + b ) = 2 a + 2 b does. The laws here come from a specific fact about the area under 1 / t , that rescaling the interval leaves the area unchanged, and that fact concerns multiplication only. Nothing in the derivation touches addition, so no law about sums can emerge from it.

The right move when facing ln ⁡ ( a + b ) . There is usually nothing to do. If the sum factors, factor it: ln ⁡ ( x 2 + x ) = ln ⁡ ( x ( x + 1 ) ) = ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x + 1 ) for x > 0 , which works because the product is what the law applies to.

---

Two further traps in the same family.

The laws require each argument positive, not merely the product. With a = b = − 2 , the left side ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ 4 exists while the right side ln ⁡ ( − 2 ) + ln ⁡ ( − 2 ) does not. So the equation ln ⁡ ( a b ) = ln ⁡ a + ln ⁡ b can fail by the right side being undefined even when the left is fine, and the law must be quoted with its condition a , b > 0 .

Combining logarithms enlarges the domain. This is the same asymmetry seen from the other direction, and it is the practical reason equations need a domain check. The step

ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x − 3 )   ⟶   ln ⁡ ( x ( x − 3 ) )

is valid on x > 3 , where both original terms exist. But the right side is defined on x < 0 as well, where the product of two negatives is positive. So the manipulation is not reversible, and solutions found afterwards may lie outside the original domain: ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ ( x − 3 ) = ln ⁡ 10 yields x = 5 and x = − 2 , and only x = 5 is a solution.

The shape of the rule. Each law has a condition, and the condition is always about the arguments being positive, because that is where ln is defined at all. When a manipulation appears to have produced something from nothing, whether an extra root or a defined expression from an undefined one, the enlargement of the domain is where to look.

Application

Where turning products into sums is the whole point

Every use below exploits the same property: ln converts multiplication into addition, and repeated multiplication into a coefficient.

Exponential decay and half-lives. A quantity obeying y ′ = k y has y = y 0 e k t , as the first-order differential equations unit shows. Asking when it halves means solving e k t = 1 2 , and the logarithm is what inverts the exponential:

t = ln ⁡ ( 1 / 2 ) k = − ln ⁡ 2 k = − 0.693147180560 k .

Every half-life calculation carries that constant. For carbon-14 with k = − 1.21 × 10 − 4 per year, the half-life is 0.693147 / 1.21 × 10 − 4 ≈ 5728 years.

Orders of magnitude. Because ln turns a factor into an increment, quantities spanning many powers of ten become manageable on a logarithmic scale: pH, decibels, stellar magnitudes, the Richter scale. An earthquake ten times larger is one unit higher, since ln ⁡ ( 10 x ) = ln ⁡ x + ln ⁡ 10 and the increment is the same constant 2.302585 wherever it is applied.

This is the original motivation for logarithms, from the era before mechanical computation: multiplying two seven-digit numbers by hand is laborious, adding their logarithms is not. The slide rule is that idea in wood.

Likelihood in statistics. The probability of independent observations is a product of many small numbers, which underflows to zero in floating-point arithmetic once there are a few hundred factors. Taking ln converts it to a sum:

ln ⁡ ∏ i p i = ∑ i ln ⁡ p i ,

which is numerically stable and, since ln is strictly increasing, has its maximum at exactly the same parameter values. Maximum likelihood is almost always computed as maximum log-likelihood for these two reasons together. One about arithmetic, one about the monotonicity established in the theorem block.

Algorithmic complexity. An algorithm halving its input each step finishes in about log 2 ⁡ n steps, because the question "how many halvings reach 1?" is exactly what a logarithm answers. Since all logarithms differ by a constant factor, log 2 ⁡ n = ln ⁡ n / ln ⁡ 2 , complexity classes do not distinguish bases, and O ( log ⁡ n ) is written without one.

The slow growth is what makes such algorithms valuable: ln ⁡ 10 12 = 27.63 , so binary search over a trillion items needs about forty comparisons.

Information and entropy. The information content of an event of probability p is − ln ⁡ p , chosen precisely so that independent events add: two events of probability p and q jointly have probability p q and information − ln ⁡ ( p q ) = − ln ⁡ p − ln ⁡ q . The additivity is not a modelling convenience but a consequence of the product law derived from the area.

Integration. Inside mathematics, ln is the answer to the single gap in the power rule, so it appears whenever an integrand has the form u ′ / u . The integration-techniques unit produces ln ⁡ | u | from substitutions and partial fractions repeatedly, and uses ln ⁡ x as the factor to differentiate under integration by parts, all resting on the definition given here.

---

The common thread. In each case something multiplicative is awkward, too large to compute, too small to represent, spanning too many scales, or lacking an antiderivative, and ln converts it into something additive. That conversion is the theorem derived in this unit from the invariance of the area under 1 / t when the interval is rescaled.

Next step

Practice The Natural Logarithm

Practice this

Results update as you type. Use the up and down arrow keys to move between results, Enter to open one, and Escape to close.

Type to search.

Settings

Appearance

Interface density

Your record

Your progress is stored in this browser and nowhere else: an identifier, the answers you have given, the mastery states and review schedule derived from them, and the lesson you last opened. Clearing it makes you a new learner on this device. It cannot be undone, and it will not affect your appearance or density settings.

Focus timer

Focus--minutes remaining

Phase

Kept in this browser only, and used to label the session in your own history.

Today

Nothing recorded yet. Finish a focus session and it will appear here.

Settings

Focus sessions between long breaks.

Sessions you are aiming for in a day.

Notifications

Your history

Sessions are stored in this browser and nowhere else. They are not evidence and never reach your mastery record.