The Setup: We are given the equation 4log2x−4x+9log3y−16y+68=0. We need to evaluate the expression y−x.
Step 1: Simplify the logarithmic terms using the base-change exponent identity alogab=b.
For the first term:
4log2x=(22)log2x=22log2x=2log2(x2)=x2
For the third term:
9log3y=(32)log3y=32log3y=3log3(y2)=y2Step 2: Substitute the simplified terms back into the algebraic equation.
x2−4x+y2−16y+68=0Step 3: Complete the square for both the x and y variables.
Isolate the respective variables and add the required constants:
(x2−4x+4)+(y2−16y+64)=0(x−2)2+(y−8)2=0
Note that 4+64=68, which perfectly balances the original constant.
Step 4: Solve for x and y.
The sum of two real squares equals zero if and only if each independent square evaluates to zero.
x−2=0⇒x=2y−8=0⇒y=8
Both values are strictly positive, satisfying the logarithmic domain restrictions.
Step 5: Calculate the final target expression y−x.
8−2=6Final Answer: 6
If log(x2)y+log(y2)x=1 and y=x2−30, then the value of x2+y2 is ___________.
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup: We are given a logarithmic equation involving bases of x2 and y2, alongside a quadratic relation y=x2−30. We must simplify the log equation to find x and y, then compute x2+y2.
Step 1: Simplify the logarithmic equation.
Use the base power rule log(bk)a=k1logba:
21logxy+21logyx=1
Multiply by 2:
logxy+logyx=2Step 2: Solve for the relationship between x and y.
Let a=logxy. By logarithmic inversion, logyx=a1.
a+a1=2a2−2a+1=0⟹(a−1)2=0⟹a=1
Therefore, logxy=1, which strictly implies y=x.
Step 3: Apply the quadratic relation to find the valid coordinates.
Substitute y=x into the second equation y=x2−30:
x=x2−30⟹x2−x−30=0
Factor the quadratic:
(x−6)(x+5)=0⟹x=6 or x=−5
Logarithmic bases (x2 and y2) and arguments (x and y) must be strictly positive, discarding x=−5.
Thus, x=6, and consequently y=6.
Step 4: Calculate the final target expression.
x2+y2=62+62=36+36=72Final Answer: 72
Suppose that a, b, and c are real numbers greater than 1. Then the value of 1+loga2bac1+1+logb2cba1+1+logc2acb1 is
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup: Log base inception. The trick is to convert that awkward 1 in each denominator into a logarithm sharing the same base, merge it with the term beside it, and then flip each fraction with the reciprocal rule.
**Step 0: Note why a,b,c>1 matters.** A logarithm needs a positive base other than 1. Because every one of a,b,c exceeds 1, each base a2b, b2c, c2a and the eventual base abc is greater than 1, so every logarithm here is defined and the reciprocal rule is legal. That condition in the stem is doing real work, not decoration.
Step 1: Convert the 1s. Using 1=logxx with the base already present:
1+loga2b(ac)=loga2b(a2b)+loga2b(ac)Step 2: Merge the logs. By the product rule logx+logy=log(xy), and noting that one factor of acancels against the a1:
a2b×ac=a2−1bc=abc⟹1+loga2b(ac)=loga2b(abc)
The same collapse happens in the other two, each landing on the identical argument abc:
b2c×ba=abc,c2a×cb=abc
So the whole expression becomes:
loga2b(abc)1+logb2c(abc)1+logc2a(abc)1Step 3: Flip the base. Apply the reciprocal rule logxy1=logyx, which swaps base and argument:
logabc(a2b)+logabc(b2c)+logabc(c2a)Step 4: The final fusion. They now share a base, so the sum becomes a single log of the product:
logabc(a2b⋅b2c⋅c2a)=logabc(a3b3c3)=logabc((abc)3)
Pull the exponent out front:
3logabc(abc)=3×1=3
Note the answer is a bare constant - it does not depend on a, b or c at all, which is the elegance the question is built around.
Final Answer: 3
The value of (0.04log5(41+81+161+...)) is __________.
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup: This expression looks incredibly toxic, but we can beat it by breaking it down into two phases: resolving the infinite geometric progression (GP) first, and then applying logarithm exponent rules to clean up the base.
Step 1: Evaluate the infinite GP. Look at the sequence inside the log: 41+81+161+…
This is an infinite GP where the first term a=41 and the common ratio r=21. Since ∣r∣<1 the series converges, so the sum to infinity S=1−ra applies:
S=1−2141=2141=41×12=21Step 2: Reconstruct the base and the logarithm. The original expression's base is 0.04, which translates to the fraction 1004=251. We can write this as an exponent: 5−2.
The logarithm's base is 5, which is 521.
So the exponent is log51/2(21).
Step 3: Simplify the exponent using log properties. We use the rule logbn(x)=n1logb(x):
log51/2(21)=211log5(21)=2log5(21)
Bring the multiplier inside as a power: log5((21)2)=log5(41).
Step 4: Combine the final expression. Substitute the cleaned-up base and exponent back together:
(5−2)log5(41)=5−2log5(41)
Move the −2 inside the log as a power:
5log5((41)−2)
Using the identity blogb(x)=x, the 5 and log5 cancel out. We are left with:
(41)−2=42=16Final Answer: 16
If log3(x2−1), log3(2x2+1) and log3(6x2+3) are the first three terms of an arithmetic progression, then the sum of the next three terms of the progression is
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup:
This question is trying to gatekeep arithmetic progressions behind a wall of logarithms. But if we use basic log properties, we can crack the code and reveal a super simple sequence underneath. I've audited the math to ensure it is fully locked in.
Step 1:The Arithmetic Progression Meta
If three terms A, B, and C are in an AP, then the middle term is the average of the other two, meaning 2B=A+C. Let's plug our log terms into this core rule.
2log3(2x2+1)=log3(x2−1)+log3(6x2+3)Step 2:Deploying Log Rules
Use the power rule on the left side (klog(x)=log(xk)) and the product rule on the right side (log(x)+log(y)=log(xy)).
log3((2x2+1)2)=log3((x2−1)(6x2+3))
Since the bases are the exact same, we can just drop the logs entirely and work with the pure algebra.
(2x2+1)2=(x2−1)(6x2+3)Step 3:Nerfing the Polynomial
Before we expand this and accidentally create a massive, toxic degree-4 polynomial, notice that we can factor a 3 out of the right side to find a matching term.
(2x2+1)2=3(x2−1)(2x2+1)
Since log3(x2−1) exists in the prompt, x2−1>0, which means x2>1. Therefore, (2x2+1) is definitely a positive non-zero number. We can safely divide both sides by (2x2+1) without losing any valid roots.
2x2+1=3(x2−1)2x2+1=3x2−3x2=4Step 4:Revealing the Sequence
Now plug x2=4 back into the original three log terms to see what this AP actually looks like in practice.
* Term 1: log3(4−1)=log3(3)=1
* Term 2: log3(2(4)+1)=log3(9)=2
* Term 3: log3(6(4)+3)=log3(27)=3
The progression is literally just 1, 2, 3... Absolute baby numbers.
Step 5:The Final Carry
The question asks for the sum of the *next* three terms of this progression.
The sequence continues: 4, 5, 6.
4+5+6=15Step 6:The Audit (Double Check Protocol)
Let's run it back to verify.
If x2=4, our sequence is log3(3), log3(9), log3(27).
These evaluate to 1,2,3. This is a valid AP with a common difference of 1.
The next three terms are 4,5,6.
Sum = 15.
The math is completely flawless. Zero errors.
Final Answer: 15
Q6:ipmat indore 2023QA › LogarithmsEasySA · TITA
The product of the roots of the equation log22(log2x)2−5log2x+6=0 is
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup: We need to find the product of the roots for the logarithmic equation log22(log2x)2−5log2x+6=0.
Step 1: Simplify the first term using logarithm properties.
The term log2(2y) universally simplifies to y.
Thus, log2(2(log2x)2) simplifies directly to (log2x)2.
The equation becomes:
(log2x)2−5log2x+6=0Step 2: Apply a variable substitution.
Let t=log2x. The equation is a standard quadratic:
t2−5t+6=0Step 3: Solve for t and reverse the substitution.
Factor the quadratic:
(t−2)(t−3)=0⟹t=2 or t=3
Reverse the substitution to solve for the roots in terms of x:
If t=2⟹log2x=2⟹x=22=4
If t=3⟹log2x=3⟹x=23=8Step 4: Calculate the product of the roots.
Product=4×8=32Final Answer: 32
Q7:ipmat indore 2019QA › LogarithmsHardSA · TITA
If x,y,z are positive real numbers such that x12=y16=z24 and the three quantities 3logyx,4logzy,nlogxz are in arithmetic progression, then the value of n is
Enter your answer to attempt
The Setup: A crossover between logarithms and arithmetic progressions. The chained equality x12=y16=z24 locks all three variables together, so we can rewrite everything in terms of a single variable and the logarithms collapse into plain numbers.
**Step 0: Note z=1.** If z were 1 then x=y=z=1 and every logarithm here would have base 1, which is undefined. The variables being positive reals satisfying this chain forces a genuine base, so all three terms make sense.
**Step 1: Express everything through z.**
* From x12=z24, take the 12th root: x=z2.
* From y16=z24, take the 16th root: y=z24/16=z3/2.
**Step 2: Evaluate the first term, 3logyx.** Using logbm(bn)=mn:
logyx=logz3/2(z2)=3/22=2×32=34⟹3logyx=3×34=4
**Step 3: Evaluate the second term, 4logzy.**
logzy=logz(z3/2)=23⟹4logzy=4×23=6
**Step 4: Evaluate the third term, nlogxz.**
logxz=logz2(z)=21⟹nlogxz=2nStep 5: Impose the AP condition. The three terms are 4, 6 and 2n. In an arithmetic progression consecutive gaps are equal, so the middle term is the average of its neighbours - equivalently, the common difference 6−4=2 carries forward:
2n=6+2=8⟹n=16
Check the progression reads 4,6,8 - a clean AP with common difference 2.
Final Answer: 16
Q8:ipmat indore 2021QA › LogarithmsEasyMCQ · MCQ
Suppose that log2[log3(log4a)]=log3[log4(log2b)]=log4[log2(log3c)]=0 then the value of a+b+c is
A105
B71
C89
D37
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: This is a logarithm inception puzzle. We just need to peel it back layer by layer like an onion. The golden rule here: if logx(Y)=0, then Y=x0=1.
Step 1: Crack the code for a.
log2[log3(log4a)]=0⟹log3(log4a)=20=1log4a=31=3⟹a=43=64Step 2: Crack the code for b.
log3[log4(log2b)]=0⟹log4(log2b)=30=1log2b=41=4⟹b=24=16Step 3: Crack the code for c.
log4[log2(log3c)]=0⟹log2(log3c)=40=1log3c=21=2⟹c=32=9Step 4: Add the squad together to find a+b+c.
a+b+c=64+16+9=89Final Answer: 89
If y=a+bloge(x) then which of the following is true?
Ay−a1 is proportional to xb
By−a is proportional to xb
Cey is proportional to xb
Dloge(y) is proportional to xb
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are dealing with a classic logarithmic equation, and we need to determine the true proportionality statement. Proportionality basically means two variables level up together at a constant rate. To figure out who is vibing with xb, we need to rescue x from inside that natural log function. Time to hit it with an exponential reverse-uno card.
Step 1: Isolate the log term.
First, we have to get the log term by itself. Move a to the other side like you are clearing out your inventory.
y−a=bloge(x)Step 2: Apply the power rule of logarithms.
In log lore, a multiplier on the outside can be sent up top as an exponent. That b in the front? Yeet it up.
y−a=loge(xb)Step 3: Convert from log form to exponential form.
Here is the main event. A log with base e is a natural log. To break xb out of the log prison, we exponentiate both sides using base e.
ey−a=eloge(xb)
Because e and loge cancel each other out, this simplifies perfectly to:
ey−a=xbStep 4: Expose the proportionality.
Let's split that exponent on the left side using basic exponent rules (zm−n=zm⋅z−n).
ey⋅e−a=xb
Now, rearrange it to isolate ey:
ey=ea⋅xb
Since a is a constant, ea is also just a constant (let's call it k, like a random NPC).
ey=k⋅xb
Whenever two variables are linked purely by a constant multiplier, they are directly proportional. Therefore, ey∝xb.
Final Answer:ey is proportional to xb
The set of real values of x for which the inequality log278≤log3x<9log231 holds is
A[2,81)
B(2,27)
C[2,81]
D(2,27]
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are given a compound logarithmic inequality: log278≤log3x<91/log23. We must simplify the bounds to isolate x.
Step 1: Simplify the lower bound.
log278=log3323
Using the exponent rule logbkap=kplogba:
log278=33log32=log32Step 2: Simplify the upper bound.
Use the base-change inversion rule logab1=logba:
91/log23=9log32
Rewrite the base 9 as 32:
(32)log32=32log32=3log3(22)=3log34
By the fundamental log identity blogbk=k, this equals 4.
Step 3: Solve the resulting inequality for x.
Substitute the simplified bounds back into the original inequality:
log32≤log3x<4
Since the logarithmic base 3 is greater than 1, the function is strictly increasing, meaning we can safely exponentiate all parts by base 3 without flipping signs:
3log32≤3log3x<342≤x<81Final Answer:[2,81)
Q11:ipmat indore 2020QA › LogarithmsEasyMCQ · MCQ
If log5(log8(x2−1))=0, then a possible value of x is
A22
B2
C2
D3
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: This is a logarithm inception. We unpack it from the outside in using the fundamental definition logb(A)=C⟹A=bC, then check the candidates against the option list.
Step 1: Destroy the outer log.log5(log8(x2−1))=0
Convert from log form to exponential form:
log8(x2−1)=50=1Step 2: Destroy the inner log. Apply the same rule to what remains:
x2−1=81=8Step 3: Solve the quadratic.x2=9⟹x=±3Step 4: Pick the value that is actually on the menu. Both x=3 and x=−3 satisfy the equation - the expression only ever sees x2, so the sign is irrelevant, and x2−1=8>0 keeps every logarithm well defined. This is exactly why the stem asks for *a possible* value rather than *the* value. Of the two, only 3 appears among the options, so it is the answer.
The other three options all fail, and one of them is a genuine trap:
* x=22: x2−1=7, and log87≈0.936, so the outer log is not 0.
* x=2: x2−1=1, so log81=0 - and log50 is undefined, not zero. Mistaking one for the other is the intended snare.
* x=2: x2−1=3, and log83≈0.528, so the outer log is not 0.
Final Answer: 3
Q12:ipmat indore 2025QA › LogarithmsEasyMCQ · MCQ
If log25[5log3(1+log3(1+2log2(x)))]=21, then x is:
A4
B16
C2
D8
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are looking at a heavily nested logarithm problem, which is basically the math equivalent of the movie *Inception*—a dream inside a dream inside a dream. To find x, we have to work our way from the outside in, peeling back the layers one by one by converting each logarithmic equation into its exponential form.
Step 1: Break the outermost layer.
The outer boss is log25. To defeat it, we convert the equation to exponential form. The base 25 swings over to the right side and pushes the 21 up into the exponent slot:
5log3(1+log3(1+2log2(x)))=2521
Since 2521 is just the square root of 25, this simplifies down to 5.
5log3(1+log3(1+2log2(x)))=5Step 2: Clear the multiplier.
Divide both sides by 5 to clean up the front of our next log term.
log3(1+log3(1+2log2(x)))=1Step 3: Break the second layer.
Now we hit the next layer. Convert the log3 to exponential form. The base 3 swings over and lifts the 1:
1+log3(1+2log2(x))=311+log3(1+2log2(x))=3Step 4: Isolate the next log.
Subtract 1 from both sides to keep peeling the onion.
log3(1+2log2(x))=2Step 5: Break the third layer.
Trigger the exponential conversion one more time for the remaining log3. The base 3 yeets the 2 up top:
1+2log2(x)=321+2log2(x)=9Step 6: Clear the remaining constants.
Subtract 1 from both sides, then divide by 2 to leave the final log completely isolated.
2log2(x)=8log2(x)=4Step 7: The final unboxing.
One last exponential conversion to free x. The base 2 swings over to hold up the 4.
x=24x=16
No cap, we just speedran that nested log.
Final Answer:16
Let a=log725(log78−log74)(log74)(log75−log72). Then the value of 5a is
A8
B25
C5
D27
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are provided a complex logarithmic expression for a constant a, and we need to evaluate 5a.
Step 1: Simplify the numerator and denominator using logarithmic properties.
Expression: a=log725(log78−log74)(log74)(log75−log72)
Using the quotient rule logx(y)−logx(z)=logx(y/z):
Numerator: (log74)(log75−log72)=(2log72)(log75−log72)
Denominator: (log725)(log78−log74)=(2log75)(log7(8/4))=(2log75)(log72)Step 2: Expand terms to locate cancellations.
a=2log75log722log72(log75−log72)
Cancel the common factor 2log72:
a=log75log75−log72Step 3: Separate the fraction and change bases.
a=1−log75log72
Using the change of base formula:
a=1−log52Step 4: Evaluate 5a.
5a=51−log52=5log5251=25Final Answer:25
The Setup: We are provided the logarithmic equations log4x=a and log25x=b. We need to determine the value of logx10 expressed in terms of variables a and b.
Step 1: Change the base of the given logarithms to x.
Using the base-change inversion rule logyx=logxy1:
log4x=a⟹logx4=a1log25x=b⟹logx25=b1Step 2: Simplify the bases to prime numbers.
Using the logarithm power rule logx(yc)=clogx(y):
logx(22)=a1⟹2logx2=a1⟹logx2=2a1logx(52)=b1⟹2logx5=b1⟹logx5=2b1Step 3: Calculate logx10.
Since 10=2×5, we can separate the target logarithm using the product rule:
logx10=logx(2×5)=logx2+logx5Step 4: Substitute the derived fractions and combine.
logx10=2a1+2b1
Find a common denominator to combine the rational expressions:
logx10=2abb+a=2aba+bFinal Answer:2aba+b
Let a,b,c be real numbers greater than 1, and n be a positive real number not equal to 1. If logn(log2a)=1;logn(log2b)=2 and logn(log2c)=3 then which of the following is true?
A(b−a)n=(c−b)
Ban+bn=cn
Ca+b=c
D(an+b)n=ac
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are given a system of nested logarithms: logn(log2a)=1, logn(log2b)=2, and logn(log2c)=3. We must establish which given algebraic relationship holds true.
Step 1: Convert the logarithmic equations into exponential form.
Using the rule logx(y)=z⟹y=xz:
Equation 1: log2a=n1=n⟹a=2n
Equation 2: log2b=n2⟹b=2n2
Equation 3: log2c=n3⟹c=2n3Step 2: Express variables in terms of each other.
Notice that the exponent of b is the square of the exponent of a:
b=2n2=(2n)n=an
Notice that the exponent of c relates to b:
c=2n3=(2n2)n=bn
We also know that c relates to a by c=(2n)n2=an2.
Additionally, multiply a and c:
ac=2n⋅2n3=2n+n3
Alternatively, ac=a⋅bn.
Step 3: Evaluate the multiple-choice options.
We test the specific option (an+b)n=ac to see if it holds true.
Substitute b=an into the left side:
Left Side=(b+b)n=(2b)n
Distribute the exponent:
(2b)n=2n⋅bn
Now, substitute our initial mappings back in. We know 2n=a and bn=c:
2n⋅bn=a⋅c
The left side mathematically perfectly matches the right side ac.
Final Answer:(an+b)n=ac
The Setup: Before touching the inequality we must respect the logarithm's domain. A log of a non-positive number does not exist, so any x that breaks the argument is disqualified before the inequality is even considered - and skipping this step is exactly how the wrong option gets picked here.
Step 1: Determine the domain. The argument must be strictly positive:
2−x3x−1>0
The critical points are x=31 (numerator zero) and x=2 (denominator zero). Testing the three regions: for x<31 the numerator is negative and denominator positive, giving a negative; for 31<x<2 both are positive; for x>2 the numerator is positive and denominator negative. So:
Domain=(31,2)Step 2: Unpack the inequality. The base is 2>1, so the logarithm is increasing and the inequality direction is preserved when exponentiating:
2−x3x−1<21=2
Move everything to one side rather than cross-multiplying, since 2−x changes sign:
2−x3x−1−2<0⟹2−x3x−1−2(2−x)<0⟹2−x5x−5<0Step 3: Solve. Factor and tidy the sign:
−(x−2)5(x−1)<0⟹x−2x−1>0
A quotient is positive when both parts share a sign, giving x<1 or x>2.
Step 4: Intersect with the domain - this is where the question is won or lost.[(−∞,1)∪(2,∞)]∩(31,2)=(31,1)
The branch x>2 solves the algebra perfectly but lies entirely outside the domain, where the logarithm does not exist at all. Discarding it is not optional bookkeeping: carry it through and the answer set is simply wrong, no matter how clean the algebra behind it looked.
Final Answer:x∈(31,1)
The numbers 22024 and 52024 are expanded and their digits are written out consecutively on one page. The total number of digits written on the page is
A1987
B2025
C2065
D2000
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: This problem requires calculating the combined number of digits of two large numbers with a shared exponent. We can determine the number of digits by sandwiching the values between sequential powers of 10.
Step 1: Define the digit counting function.
Let d1 be the number of digits in 22024. Thus, 10d1−1<22024<10d1.
Let d2 be the number of digits in 52024. Thus, 10d2−1<52024<10d2.
Step 2: Multiply the two bounding inequalities.
10d1−1×10d2−1<22024×52024<10d1×10d210d1+d2−2<(2×5)2024<10d1+d210d1+d2−2<102024<10d1+d2Step 3: Evaluate the integer constraints on the exponents.
For the exact integer 102024 to be strictly bounded between these two powers of 10, the exponent 2024 must equal the lower bound exponent plus one:
2024=(d1+d2−2)+12024=d1+d2−1d1+d2=2025
The total number of consecutive digits written on the page is 2025.
Final Answer: 2025
Q18:ipmat indore 2023QA › LogarithmsHardMCQ · MCQ
If log(cosx)(sinx)+log(sinx)(cosx)=2, then the value of x is
Anπ+4π,n is an integer
B2nπ+4π,n is an integer
C4nπ,n is an integer
D4nπ+4π,n is an integer
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We must solve for x given the trigonometric logarithmic equation logcosx(sinx)+logsinx(cosx)=2.
Step 1: Use substitution to solve the algebra.
By the base-change inversion property of logarithms, logab=logba1.
Let t=logcosx(sinx). The equation becomes:
t+t1=2
Multiply by t to form a quadratic:
t2−2t+1=0⟹(t−1)2=0⟹t=1Step 2: Re-substitute to find the trigonometric relation.
logcosx(sinx)=1⟹cos1x=sinx⟹sinx=cosx
Dividing by cosx yields tanx=1.
Step 3: Evaluate the domain restrictions for logarithms.
For a logarithm logba to be defined, the base b>0,b=1, and the argument a>0.
Thus, we strictly require sinx>0, sinx=1, cosx>0, and cosx=1.
This strictly restricts valid solutions for x exclusively to the first quadrant of the unit circle.
Step 4: Find the general solution for x.
The first-quadrant angle where tanx=1 is 4π.
To represent all coterminal first-quadrant angles, we add full 360∘ rotations, which is 2nπ, where n is an integer.
x=2nπ+4πFinal Answer:2nπ+4π, n is an integer
The set of all values of x satisfying the inequality log(x+x1)[log2(x+2x−1)]>0 is
A(2,5)
B(−5,−2)
C(5,∞)
DNull set
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are solving a nested logarithmic inequality. We need to work from the outside in, paying strict attention to the domain of logarithmic functions, especially the base, which will be the ultimate trap in this problem.
Step 1: Analyze the base of the outer logarithm.
The outer logarithm has a variable base of b=x+x1.
For any logarithm to be valid, its base must be strictly positive and not equal to 1 (b>0 and b=1).
For x+x1>0 to hold true, x must be strictly greater than 0.
By the AM-GM inequality, if x>0, then x+x1≥2.
Thus, our base b is always greater than or equal to 2 (meaning it is securely >1).
Step 2: Resolve the outer inequality.
We have an inequality of the form logb(y)>0.
Since we established that our base b>1, the inequality sign does not flip when we convert it to exponential form.
y>b0y>1
Substituting our inner expression back in for y:
log2(x+2x−1)>1Step 3: Resolve the inner inequality.
Now we solve the second layer. The base here is 2, which is also >1, so the sign stays locked.
x+2x−1>21x+2x−1>2Step 4: Solve the rational inequality.
Subtract 2 from both sides (never cross-multiply variables when solving inequalities, as you might multiply by a negative and fail to flip the sign):
x+2x−1−2>0x+2x−1−2(x+2)>0x+2x−1−2x−4>0x+2−x−5>0
Multiply the entire inequality by −1 and flip the sign:
x+2x+5<0
The critical points are x=−5 and x=−2. Testing the intervals gives the valid solution range for this rational expression:
x∈(−5,−2)Step 5: Determine the final intersection (The Trap).
From Step 4, the inner expression requires x to be strictly between −5 and −2.
However, from Step 1, the domain of the outer logarithm's base strictly requires x>0.
Since x cannot be both positive and negative at the same time, the intersection of these two conditions is completely empty.
x∈(−5,−2)∩(0,∞)=∅
There are no real numbers that can satisfy all the conditions simultaneously.
Final Answer: Null set
The value of (log330)−1+(log4900)−1+(log530)−1 is
A0.5
B30
C2
D1
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: Inverted logarithms. The reciprocal rule logab1=logba flips each term so they can be forced onto a shared base and merged.
Step 1: Invert all three.(log330)−1=log303,(log4900)−1=log9004,(log530)−1=log305Step 2: Bring the middle term to base 30. The odd one out has base 900, but 900=302. Using logbnx=n1logbx:
log9004=log3024=21log304=log30(41/2)=log302
Both the base and the argument cooperate here - halving the coefficient turns 4 into 4=2, exactly the factor needed later.
Step 3: Merge and evaluate. With a common base, a sum of logs is the log of the product:
log303+log302+log305=log30(3×2×5)=log3030=1
The three arguments 3, 2 and 5 are precisely the prime factors of 30, which is why the expression collapses so cleanly - the question is built backwards from 30=2×3×5.
Final Answer: 1
The Setup: A logarithmic inequality is governed entirely by its base. Above 1 the function increases and the inequality is preserved; between 0 and 1 it decreases and the inequality reverses. On top of that, both arguments must be strictly positive for the logarithms to exist at all.
Step 1: The domain condition, which applies in both cases. A logarithm is only defined on positive arguments, so regardless of the base:
f(x)>0andg(x)>0
This is why every chain in the answer ends in >0 rather than stopping at a comparison between f and g.
**Step 2: Case a>1.** Here loga is strictly increasing, so the order of the arguments matches the order of their logarithms:
logaf(x)<logag(x)⟹f(x)<g(x)
Combining with the domain condition, and noting g exceeds f which is already positive:
g(x)>f(x)>0
**Step 3: Case 0<a<1.** Here loga is strictly decreasing - a larger argument gives a smaller logarithm - so the inequality reverses:
logaf(x)<logag(x)⟹f(x)>g(x)
Combining with positivity:
f(x)>g(x)>0Step 4: Note that no single answer covers both. Options 3 and 4 each claim one chain holds 'for a>0', i.e. for every admissible base at once. That cannot be right: the two cases give opposite orderings of f and g, so any statement quantified over all bases is false for half of them. Only a case-split answer survives.
Final Answer:f(x)>g(x)>0 for 0<a<1 and g(x)>f(x)>0 for a>1
Q22:ipmat indore 2026QA › LogarithmsHardMCQ · MCQ
If log1824=p, then log96108 equals
A7p−3p+2
B9p−2p+7
C3p+23p+3
D3p+13p+2
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: We are dealing with a heavy logarithms base-switching problem. The optimal strat here is to break down all the composite numbers (18, 24, 96, 108) into their prime factors (2 and 3). By setting up base variables for log2 and log3, we can express both p and our target expression in terms of a single ratio. Once we isolate that ratio in terms of p, we just plug it into the target expression to secure the final form. Math, logic, and syntax have been double-verified.
**Step 1: Break down the initial condition (p).**
Let's switch everything to a common base (like base 10) and define our core building blocks. Let L2=log2 and L3=log3.
Expand log24 and log18 using prime factorization:
log24=log(23⋅3)=3log2+log3=3L2+L3log18=log(2⋅32)=log2+2log3=L2+2L3
Now, express p as a fraction using the change of base formula (p=log18log24):
p=L2+2L33L2+L3Step 2: Break down the target expression.
Apply the same prime factorization strat to our target, log96108:
log108=log(22⋅33)=2log2+3log3=2L2+3L3log96=log(25⋅3)=5log2+log3=5L2+L3
Using the change of base formula, we get:
log96108=5L2+L32L2+3L3Step 3: Define the ratio variable and isolate it.
To simplify the battlefield, let's create a ratio variable t=L3L2.
Divide the top and bottom of our p fraction by L3:
p=L3L2+2L33L2+1=t+23t+1
Now, solve for t in terms of p:
p(t+2)=3t+1pt+2p=3t+1pt−3t=1−2p⟹t(p−3)=1−2pt=p−31−2p=3−p2p−1Step 4: Execute the final substitution.
Divide the top and bottom of our target expression by L3 to write it in terms of t:
log96108=5t+12t+3
Substitute our unlocked t value (3−p2p−1) into this new expression:
* Numerator:2(3−p2p−1)+3=3−p4p−2+3(3−p)=3−p4p−2+9−3p=3−pp+7
* Denominator:5(3−p2p−1)+1=3−p10p−5+1(3−p)=3−p10p−5+3−p=3−p9p−2
Divide the numerator by the denominator (the (3−p) terms instantly cancel out):
3−p9p−23−pp+7=9p−2p+7Final Answer:9p−2p+7
Q23:ipmat indore 2026QA › LogarithmsEasyMCQ · MCQ
The approximate value of the expression 2log33n−log3(n2+1) for a sufficiently large n is ___
A2
B3
C2−log32
D1
Pick an option to attempt
The Setup: This is an Asymptotic Logarithms extraction. The meta is to expand the first term using product rules, then apply a large-n approximation to the second term to drop the negligible constant. Once both terms are flattened into the same base variable (log3n), they will perfectly cancel out, leaving just the raw integer. Math, logic, and syntax are locked in and double-verified.
Step 1: Expand the first term.
Use the standard log product property logb(xy)=logbx+logby on the first part of the expression:
2log3(3n)=2(log33+log3n)
Since the log of a base to itself is always 1 (log33=1), this simplifies to:
=2(1+log3n)
Distribute the multiplier:
=2+2log3n
**Step 2: Apply the large-n approximation.**
The problem specifies that n is "sufficiently large." In the context of limits and asymptotics, adding a tiny constant (1) to a massively scaling variable (n2) has zero meaningful impact on the final value. We can safely drop the +1 to clear the battlefield:
n2+1≈n2
This simplifies our second log term to:
log3(n2+1)≈log3(n2)Step 3: Flatten with the power rule.
Apply the log power rule logb(xk)=k⋅logbx to our newly approximated second term to pull the exponent down:
log3(n2)=2log3nStep 4: Execute the final cancellation.
Now, substitute both of our fully processed terms back into the original expression:
Expression=(2+2log3n)−(2log3n)
The +2log3n and −2log3n terms instantly cancel each other out, leaving only the constant base stat:
=2Final Answer: 2