Jenn claims that because log (1) + log (2) + log (3) = log (6), then log (2) + log (3) + log (4) = log (9).

Is she correct? Explain how you know.

No, she is not correct

Step-by-step explanation:

Hi there!

In the first case it works because of this logarithm property:

log (a·b) = log a + log b

Let's see:

log (6) = log (1) + log (2) + log (3)

because 6 = 1 · 2 · 3

So, instead log (6) we can write:

log (1 · 2 · 3)

And by the property of logarithm written above:

log (6) = log (1 · 2 · 3) = log (1) + log (2) + log (3)

In the second case:

9 ≠ 2 · 3 · 4

Then:

log (9) ≠ log (2 · 3 · 4)

Thus

log (9) ≠ log (2) + log (3) + log (4)

Have a nice day!