How do you prove that ln(a^x) = xln(a) and a^x = e^xln(a) without using exponent rules?

In summary, to prove that ln(a^x) = xln(a) without using exponent rules, we can start from the definition of the natural logarithm as the inverse of the exponential function. By setting y = a^x, taking the natural logarithm of both sides gives ln(y) = ln(a^x). By the property of logarithms that relates multiplication to addition, we deduce that ln(a^x) is equivalent to xln(a). For the second part, to show that a^x = e^(xln(a)), we can again use the definition of the natural logarithm. We rewrite a as e^(ln(a)), so a^x becomes (e^(ln(a)))^x. By the
  • #1
logicgate
10
2
Homework Statement
The proof must contain all real numbers x, not just for integers, it must be true for rational and irrational numbers.
Relevant Equations
ln(a^x) = xln(a), a^x = e^xln(a)
In the book "Calculus by Michael Spivak" it says that a^x = e^xln(a) is a definition. And I am not convinced to accept this as true without a proof.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You want to define ##a^x## for any real number ##x##. I suppose we can assume ##a\geq 0## for otherwise, we would get into trouble already with rational values of ##x.## I know what ##a^z## for ##z\in \mathbb{Z}## is since we can define it recursively. That allows us to define ##a^{1/n}=\sqrt[n]{a}## since an ##n## long product of them yields ##1.## We get therefore the definition for all ##x\in \mathbb{Q}.##

Now, it gets complicated. The real numbers are limits of certain sequences of rational numbers. Say we have ##x=\displaystyle{\lim_{n \to \infty}}x_n## and we require that ##x \mapsto a^x## is continuous. We need this condition so that we can define ##a^x= \displaystyle{\lim_{n \to \infty}}a^{x_n}.## The requirement makes sense if we look at the drawings of ##x_n \mapsto a^{x_n}.## However, it is an artificial requirement in the sense that we can only get from the rational to the reals if we accept a topological homomorphism, a continuous function.

Thus, we have defined ##a^x## by algebraic and topological means, that mimic the process from natural numbers over integers and rational numbers to real numbers.

So far so good. Now, what are ##x\mapsto e^x## and ##a\mapsto \ln(a)##? You have to define them before we prove the statement. For example, their definition by functional equations is possibly less helpful than their definition by power series or limits. So what are they to you? In order to prove something, we must agree on what we are allowed to use.
 
  • Like
Likes e_jane
  • #3
use power series
 
  • #4
Let us use that ##e^{\ln(x)}=x## or prove it with your power series. With that, we only have to show that ##x\cdot \ln a = \ln a^x## and the second equation follows. We can also assume that ##x>0## since the negative case ...
\begin{align*}
\ln a^{-x}&=\ln \dfrac{1}{a^x}=\ln \left(\dfrac{1}{a}\right)^x =x\ln \left(\dfrac{1}{a}\right)\\
&=x\cdot \left(\ln 1 -\ln a\right)=x\cdot(0-\ln a)=-x\ln a
\end{align*}
... follows from the positive case and ##x=0## is trivial. I would suggest that you use
$$\ln a^x=\lim _{h\to 0}\int _{1}^{a^x}{\frac {1}{t^{1-h}}}\,\mathrm {d} t$$
as definition and substitute ##s=t^{1/x}.##
 
  • #5
How did you arrive to the conclusion that ln(1/a)^x = xln(1/a) ? This is exactly what I want to prove.
 
  • #6
I did not arrive there. I proposed possible paths. You could prove it for rationals and use continuity and the fact that ##\mathbb{Q}\subseteq \mathbb{R}## is dense, or you can use the integral definition and the substitution I suggested.

However, you should do some of the steps on your own.
 
  • Like
Likes e_jane and PeroK
  • #7
By definition:
$$b^n = \underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{n \text{ times}}$$
Therefore we get our first identity:
$$b^{n+m} = \underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{n \text{ times}}\times\underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{m \text{ times}}$$
$$b^{n+m} = b^n b^m$$
Similarly, we can get our second identity:
$$\left({b^n}\right)^m = \underbrace{\underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{n \text{ times}}\times\underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{n \text{ times}}\ ... \times \underbrace{b \times b\ ... \times b}_{n \text{ times}}}_{m \text{ times}}$$
$$\left({b^n}\right)^m = b^{nm}$$
About how this applies to rational and irrational numbers you can read the Wikipedia page about exponentiation starting here.

If you accept that and we define that ##y = \log_b x## if ##b^y = x##, then by our first identity:
$$b^{y_1}b^{y_2} = b^{y_1 + y_2}$$
$$x_1x_2 = b^{y_1 + y_2}$$
$$\log_b(x_1x_2) = y_1+y_2$$
$$\log_b(x_1x_2) = \log_b x_1+\log_b x_2$$
From there, if ##x_1 = x_2 = a##, then:
$$\log_b(a^2) = \log_b a+\log_b a = 2 \log_b a$$
And for ##\log_b(a^3)##, we get:
$$\log_b(a^2\times a) = 2\log_b a+\log_b a = 3 \log_b a$$
Or for the general case:
$$\log_b(a^x) = x \log_b a$$
As for the other case, we used the second identity:
$$a^x = \left(a\right)^x$$
$$a^x = \left(e^{ln(a)}\right)^x$$
$$a^x = e^{xln(a)}$$
 

FAQ: How do you prove that ln(a^x) = xln(a) and a^x = e^xln(a) without using exponent rules?

What is the definition of the natural logarithm function?

The natural logarithm function, denoted as ln(x), is the inverse of the exponential function with base e. This means that if y = ln(x), then e^y = x. The function ln(x) is defined for all positive real numbers x and has properties that make it useful in calculus and other areas of mathematics.

How can we use the properties of logarithms to prove ln(a^x) = xln(a)?

To prove ln(a^x) = xln(a) without using exponent rules, we can use the definition of the natural logarithm. Let y = ln(a). By definition, this means that e^y = a. Therefore, a^x = (e^y)^x. Using the property of exponents that (e^y)^x = e^(yx), we have a^x = e^(yx). Taking the natural logarithm of both sides, we get ln(a^x) = ln(e^(yx)). Since the natural logarithm and the exponential function are inverses, ln(e^(yx)) = yx. Substituting back y = ln(a), we have ln(a^x) = xln(a).

How do we express a^x in terms of the exponential function with base e?

To express a^x in terms of the exponential function with base e, we use the fact that any positive number a can be written as e^(ln(a)). Therefore, a^x can be rewritten as (e^(ln(a)))^x. Using the property of exponents that (e^(ln(a)))^x = e^(xln(a)), we have a^x = e^(xln(a)).

Why is it valid to take the natural logarithm of both sides of an equation?

Taking the natural logarithm of both sides of an equation is valid because the natural logarithm is a continuous and strictly increasing function, which means it preserves the equality. If two expressions are equal, their natural logarithms will also be equal. This property allows us to manipulate equations involving exponentials and logarithms.

Can these proofs be generalized to other logarithm bases besides the natural logarithm?

Yes, these proofs can be generalized to other logarithm bases. For a logarithm with base b, denoted as log_b(x), we use the change of base formula: log_b(x) = ln(x) / ln(b). Using this, we can prove similar properties by expressing logarithms and exponentials in terms of the natural logarithm and the exponential function with base e. The fundamental properties of logarithms and exponents remain consistent across different bases.

Back
Top