4 ms·

> The particular topics he wanted me to cover were integrating log x, or ln x as he called it What's wrong with calling it ln x? The way this is written in the

> The particular topics he wanted me to cover were integrating log x, or ln x as he called it What's wrong with calling it ln x? The way this is written in the article implies there's something weird about calling it that. The name 'log' can mean log2, log10 or natural logarithm depending on the field. Removing ambiguities from math notation should be considered a good thing. The author expressed a worry about math education. Consider that a clear non ambiguous notation would help.

dan-robertson 5y ago
Most mathematicians use log to mean either natural log, or sometimes log in the relevant base (e.g. 2 if you are talking about information theory). In school (and engineering or physics I guess) you often are made to use ln for natural log and you are taught a way to pronounce that name (somewhere between lun and l’n) It feels like the point is “this person had not been exposed to university style mathematics”.
- SilasX 5y ago
  "Yes, how dare someone have a different context than me [in which ln x is correct and log x is not]." Similar to those who mock people for saying a word incorrectly that they only learned from reading.
- Aardwolf 5y ago
  > It feels like the point is “this person had not been exposed to university style mathematics”. Imho math is about logic and reasoning, not about what group you're part of
  - jfengel 5y ago
    The group is a bigger deal than you might expect. There are an infinite number of true theorems, almost all of which are boring. Mathematicians decide what is interesting, and that's not a matter of logic. A computer can bang out new theorems at light speed but nobody cares. Mathematics, like science and programming, is as much about humans as about the raw logic and data. You're welcome to be a group of one and please only yourself. But then you wouldn't care if it were published, and it wouldn't be unless you showed it to someone and they took an interest.
- CornCobs 5y ago
  For me it's the opposite - in secondary school education the math teachers made the distinction between "log" and "lon" (how they pronounced it) probably because that's what's written on our Casio calculators! Whereas in uni log is generally assumed to be the natural log, or else it's specified, or else the base is unimportant (like in big O notation)
  - stan_rogers 5y ago
    It made a difference long before Casio calculators, when tables were your main source of values (that would be this old fart's day). You could argue that as long as you stuck to the same table set, it doesn't really matter - but tell that to the decibels.
- filmor 5y ago
  Actually, another possible convention is "I don't care about the base", as in O(n log n) or in general in most of Asymptotic Analysis. This becomes fun when people start talking about O(2^(log n)) where the chosen base becomes relevant again :)
yellowcake0 5y ago
The ln notation has gone out of fashion with mathematicians. Generally the base is clear from the context, or it's irrelevant. As someone who has done a lot of mathematics in their life, I've never found this perceived ambiguity to be an issue.

dan-robertson 5y ago

Most mathematicians use log to mean either natural log, or sometimes log in the relevant base (e.g. 2 if you are talking about information theory). In school (and engineering or physics I guess) you often are made to use ln for natural log and you are taught a way to pronounce that name (somewhere between lun and l’n) It feels like the point is “this person had not been exposed to university style mathematics”.

SilasX 5y ago
"Yes, how dare someone have a different context than me [in which ln x is correct and log x is not]." Similar to those who mock people for saying a word incorrectly that they only learned from reading.
Aardwolf 5y ago
> It feels like the point is “this person had not been exposed to university style mathematics”. Imho math is about logic and reasoning, not about what group you're part of
- jfengel 5y ago
  The group is a bigger deal than you might expect. There are an infinite number of true theorems, almost all of which are boring. Mathematicians decide what is interesting, and that's not a matter of logic. A computer can bang out new theorems at light speed but nobody cares. Mathematics, like science and programming, is as much about humans as about the raw logic and data. You're welcome to be a group of one and please only yourself. But then you wouldn't care if it were published, and it wouldn't be unless you showed it to someone and they took an interest.
CornCobs 5y ago
For me it's the opposite - in secondary school education the math teachers made the distinction between "log" and "lon" (how they pronounced it) probably because that's what's written on our Casio calculators! Whereas in uni log is generally assumed to be the natural log, or else it's specified, or else the base is unimportant (like in big O notation)
- stan_rogers 5y ago
  It made a difference long before Casio calculators, when tables were your main source of values (that would be this old fart's day). You could argue that as long as you stuck to the same table set, it doesn't really matter - but tell that to the decibels.
filmor 5y ago
Actually, another possible convention is "I don't care about the base", as in O(n log n) or in general in most of Asymptotic Analysis. This becomes fun when people start talking about O(2^(log n)) where the chosen base becomes relevant again :)

yellowcake0 5y ago

The ln notation has gone out of fashion with mathematicians. Generally the base is clear from the context, or it's irrelevant. As someone who has done a lot of mathematics in their life, I've never found this perceived ambiguity to be an issue.