Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Widened calculations step by step [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by AngusMcLean – USA, 2010-11-09 21:46 (5301 d 12:33 ago) – Posting: # 6127
Views: 13,914

Many Thanks! At highschool in the UK log(1.25)/0.25 =0.096910013/0.25
=0.38764. In other words the the term "log" pertained to a logarithm to the base 10.

Now for a log to the base e (otherwise known as a natural logarithm or Napierian logarithm) we were taught to use the term "ln". They were first used by John Napier, who was a Scottish mathematician (late 17^th century).

So ln(1.25)/0.25=0.892574205, which is what you have.

On the calculators here in the US there are log and ln functions to use as appropriate.

So now I realize that in future when I read an equation that I have to look out for this difference in notation.

Angus

Complete thread:

• reference scaled bioequivalence AngusMcLean 2010-11-07 14:55 
  • reference scaled bioequivalence Helmut 2010-11-07 16:08
    • reference scaled bioequivalence AngusMcLean 2010-11-08 22:22
      • RSABE: FDA vs. EMA Helmut 2010-11-09 02:13
        • Farside CV relabelling d_labes 2010-11-09 10:42
          • Farside CV relabelling Helmut 2010-11-09 15:10
            • Laszlo's constant d_labes 2010-11-09 16:46
          • Farside CV relabelling AngusMcLean 2010-11-09 17:12
            • Widened calculations step by step d_labes 2010-11-09 19:48
              • Widened calculations step by stepAngusMcLean 2010-11-09 20:46
                • ln vs. log Helmut 2010-11-09 22:07
                • ln on US calculators! d_labes 2010-11-10 08:31
                  • Spreadsheet addiction Helmut 2010-11-10 13:42
            • CV vs. sigma Helmut 2010-11-09 20:11
              • CV vs. sigma AngusMcLean 2010-11-09 20:57
                • log(e) vs. log(10) Helmut 2010-11-09 21:31
              • slide 15 of the Pharsight presentation SDavis 2010-11-19 18:02
        • one more ref. for the ref. list of RSABE yjlee168 2010-11-30 07:16
          • Great! Helmut 2010-11-30 15:44