Find the smallest number among the following numbers:
(A) lo g 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6
(B) lo g 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7
(C) lo g 2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8
(D) lo g 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9
(E) lo g 2 0 1 9 2 0 2 0
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
The correct interpretation of lo g x ( x + 1 ) should be ln ( x + 1 ) / ln ( x ) .
lo g x ( x + 1 ) = ln ( x + 1 ) − ln ( x )
Log in to reply
Thanks for your feedback!
I fixed my solution immediately.
The five terms are of the form lo g n ( n + 1 ) = lo g n lo g ( n + 1 ) . Let n = m + 1 , then we have
lo g n ( n + 1 ) = lo g ( m + 1 ) lo g ( m + 2 ) ⇒ lo g n ( n + 1 ) ∝ lo g ( 1 + m 1 ) lo g ( 1 + m 2 ) [ ∝ means "increases with" ] ∝ m 1 − 2 1 ( m 1 ) 2 + 3 1 ( m 1 ) 3 − . . . m 2 − 2 1 ( m 2 ) 2 + 3 1 ( m 2 ) 3 − . . . ∝ 1 + 2 m 1 2 + m 2 = 2 m + 1 4 m + 4 = 2 + 2 m + 1 2 ∝ 2 n − 1 1
This means that the larger the n the smaller the lo g n ( n + 1 ) . Therefore, the smallest option is ( E ) lo g 2 0 1 9 2 0 2 0
Your statement is only true for asymptotic behavior. There might be local variances which affect how the fractions actually behave.
You have to be very careful in the first line. It is not immediately apparent that "As the value of lo g ( m + 1 ) lo g ( m + 2 ) increases, then so would the value of lo g ( m + 1 ) − lo g m lo g ( m + 2 ) − lo g m . There are several aspects of this statement that needs to be proved.
This is a very nice attempt, despite the considerations that you have to make.
please explain the line after (log(1+2/m))/(log(1+1/m))..
Log in to reply
They are Maclaurin series of ln ( 1 + x ) .
What is asymptotic behavior???
Asymptotic is an infinitely long line perpendicular to x axis
How did you say that larger the
n
n
+
1
,
larger will be
l
o
g
n
l
o
g
(
n
+
1
)
?
Please explain!!!
Log in to reply
Sorry, it was just intuition. I have provided another solution.
In other words, we can show that log_x(x+1) is a decreasing function by considering its derivative. This has been shown at f'(x) because xln(x) is an increasing function.
This is a very intuitive solution. Take these three numbers: l o g 2 3 , l o g 3 4 , and l o g 4 5 . You will notice that the first number l o g 2 3 has to have a larger exponent in order to yield a result of +1. But as the base increases, the exponent power, or the logarithm, needed to have a result 1 greater than base decreases. So that means the logarithm expression decreases with increased bases. Therefore, option E , l o g 2 0 1 9 2 0 2 0 , would have the smallest value.
Option E A=1.000065212 B=1.000065175 C=1.000065139 D=1.000065102 E=1.000065066
now that's cheating Sir, nobody said calculators are allowed.
but if you can do this by hand that's impressive
Generalize. Prove log n-1 n > log n n+1 with n in a close neighbour hood of 2015 and 2020 and we see that it has to be the last one E)
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We will prove that for positive number x and x > 1 , we have lo g x ( x + 1 ) > lo g x + 1 ( x + 2 ) .
Indeed, we have:
lo g x ( x + 1 ) > lo g x + 1 ( x + 2 )
⇔ ln x ln ( x + 1 ) > ln ( x + 1 ) ln ( x + 2 )
⇔ ln 2 ( x + 1 ) > ln x ∗ ln ( x + 2 )
Applying the Arithmetic Mean Geometric Mean Inequality , we get:
ln x + ln ( x + 2 ) ≥ 2 ln x ∗ ln ( x + 2 )
On the other hand, we have: ( x + 1 ) 2 > x ( x + 2 ) ⇔ 2 ln ( x + 1 ) > ln x + ln ( x + 2 )
Thus, ln ( x + 1 ) > ln x ∗ ln ( x + 2 ) or ln 2 ( x + 1 ) > ln x ∗ ln ( x + 2 )
So the smallest number is E .