Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We have:

$$\log_a{x^n}=\log_a{\left( x\cdot x \cdot x \cdot ...\cdot x\right)}=\log_a(x)+\log_a(x)+...+\log_a(x)=n\log_a(x)$$

But, $$ \ln\left(-1\right)^2=\ln{\left(-1\right)^2}\\\ln(1)=2\ln(-1)\\ 0=2i\pi$$


$$ \log_a(-1)^3=\log_a(-1)^3 \\ \log_a(-1)=3\log_a(-1) \\1=3 $$

So, if the "identity" first written is just for $x\in\mathbb{R}| x>0$ tell me why, or where I'm I failing at!

share|cite|improve this question
The logarithm becomes multivalued when you leave $\mathbb R^+$. So, yes to the first part of your last sentence. – Rahul Jan 4 '13 at 4:02
See here for more information too. – JavaMan Jan 4 '13 at 4:04
up vote 4 down vote accepted

If you'd like to use the identity $$ \ln x^n=n \ln x, $$ you should consider the definition of logarithm as a multivalued function: $$ \textrm{Ln}\, z=\ln |z|+i \mathrm{Arg}\, z=\ln |z|+i(\theta+2\pi k), $$ i.e., there are infinitely many values. Using this definition your examples are valid: $$ \textrm{Ln}\,(-1)^2=\textrm{Ln}\, (-1)^2\\ \textrm{Ln}\,1=2 \textrm{Ln}\, (-1)\\ i 2\pi k=2i(\pi+2\pi m), $$ where the last equality is understood modulo $2\pi k i$.

share|cite|improve this answer

The identities

$$\log_a{x^n}=n\log_a(x)$$ and $$\log_a(xy)=\log_a(x)+\log_a(y) \,.$$

are proven for positive $x,y$. Their proof uses (hidden) the fact that the exponential function $a^x : \mathbb R \to (0, \infty)$ is a bijection....This is not true anymore when you extend it to complex numbers.

share|cite|improve this answer

The exponentiation function is not one-to-one. For any $a$ and $x$, there are many complex numbers $y$ such that $$a^y = x$$ and therefore there are many numbers $y$ that of which it can be said that $$y=log_a x.$$ For positive real $x$ we can define $y$ to be the unique real number for which this holds; for other $x$, we cannot.

This means that you cannot conclude from $$\log_a x = \log_a x'$$ that $$x = x'$$ except under certain limited circumstances, just as you cannot conclude from $$x^2 = y^2$$ to $$x = y$$ except under certain limited circumstances.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.