When answering this question, I came up with the following:
Suppose we have a length $l$ and integrate $\frac 1 l$ over $l$: $$\int \frac {\operatorname d\!l}l=\ln l$$ Since the dimension of $l$ is length, and $\ln$ should have a dimensionless argument, this cannot be a 'good' integral in the physical sense, although it would be mathematically (omitting units). A way to solve this would be to reformulate the indefinite integral like this: for $c=-\ln (1 \text{meter})$. $$ \int \frac {\operatorname d\!l}l=\ln l+C=\ln l-\ln( 1\text{m})=\ln\left(\frac{l}{1\text{meter}}\right) $$ The question is whether the first integral given would be acceptable and how to deal with the two logarithms with bad arguments, which, when combined, aren't a problem anymore.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The problem of dealing with logarithms of quantities units is a common one in physics. Normally you can just use $\ln \frac{l}{l_0}$ for some $l_0$ but manipulating expressions with logarmithms might be a bit PITA if you want to be rigorous. But why do you say that logarithm of $1$ meter should equal $0$? Note that $\frac{1}{l}$ is the derivative of $\ln \frac{l}{l_0}$ for any positive $l_0$. $\endgroup$
    – JiK
    Feb 9 '14 at 11:27
  • $\begingroup$ @JiK (+1) For teaching me great abbreviations. $\endgroup$
    – J.R.
    Feb 9 '14 at 11:29

I think your integral does not make any sense, at least in a physical sense, because it's not a definite integral. Indeed, when computing the non-dimensional elongation in a given direction, this should be as follows:

$$\epsilon = \int^L_{L_0} \frac{d l}{l} = \ln{\frac{L}{L_0}},$$

so the units are correct. This also happens when considering the work done by a force along a given path. For example, considering the dissipated energy due to friction along a straight line of length $x-x_0$ it gives:

$$W_r = \int^x_{x_0} F_r \, dx = F_r (x - x_0),$$

assuming $F_r$ is constant, which has units of work or energy, [J] (there's a lot of more interesting examples). In resume, in physics/engineering you almost never work with indefinite integrals in a physical meaningful way.



The indefinite integral is never equal to a particular function, so both suggestions you gave are incorrect. What we do have, however, is that the indefinite integral is a class of functions that differ by a constant. When you use the indefinite integral to compute a definite integral, the constant will vanish, and so will any units that got fed into the logarithm, if indeed the original integral made sense with the units. For instance, $\ln(2\text{ m}) - \ln(1\text{ m}) = ln(2)-ln(1)$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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