Difference between revisions of "Talk:Natural logarithm"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with 'Curious as to why it's called "natural"? Could the article explain that? I wonder if it has something to do with this being the only valid kind of logarithm, and all others just ...') |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Curious as to why it's called "natural"? Could the article explain that? I wonder if it has something to do with this being the only valid kind of logarithm, and all others just being unnecessary abstractions invented by mathematicians. [[User:RichardA|RichardA]] 22:39, 25 May 2009 (EDT) | Curious as to why it's called "natural"? Could the article explain that? I wonder if it has something to do with this being the only valid kind of logarithm, and all others just being unnecessary abstractions invented by mathematicians. [[User:RichardA|RichardA]] 22:39, 25 May 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I'll try to get around to editing the article at some point, but the term "natural" most likely comes from the ability of the natural logarithm to undergo operations in calculus more easily than logarithms with other bases, and from the fact that it can be expressed as a [[Taylor series]] more easily than logarithms of other bases as well (not sure how much information Conservapedia has on Taylor series, but I thought I'd mention that anyway). --[[User:Economist|Economist]] 00:35, 26 May 2009 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 04:35, May 26, 2009
Curious as to why it's called "natural"? Could the article explain that? I wonder if it has something to do with this being the only valid kind of logarithm, and all others just being unnecessary abstractions invented by mathematicians. RichardA 22:39, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
- I'll try to get around to editing the article at some point, but the term "natural" most likely comes from the ability of the natural logarithm to undergo operations in calculus more easily than logarithms with other bases, and from the fact that it can be expressed as a Taylor series more easily than logarithms of other bases as well (not sure how much information Conservapedia has on Taylor series, but I thought I'd mention that anyway). --Economist 00:35, 26 May 2009 (EDT)