Re: Question on logs (last one of the day, I promise)
by Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
May 1, 2008 at 10:29 PM
henrysun909@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> I realize this is probably a stupid question, but if one has an
> equation like
>
> 2log3x = 2 + log3(x-2), how does one account for the "2 +" part of
> the equation on the left?
Maybe express 2 as a logarithm and proceed from there.
Are those supposed to be logs to base 3? I'd write log_3 x, where the
underscore indicates that the 3 is a subscript.
