The mathematics of sun-block – an interesting (but superfluous) use of

exponential and logarithmic functions.

SPF 30 does not block out twice as much harmful radiation as SPF 15. SPF is not sun-filtering, it
is a S(un)P(rotecting)F(actor). The label tells you how much time you can spend in the sun
before you start to burn (compared with the time for bare skin); 15 times longer for SPF 15, 30
times longer for SPF 30. But SPF 30 only blocks out about only about 3% more of harmful
UVA and UVB radiation. [Note: UVA radiation is not from the University of Virginia.]

Here’s what happens. Let’s suppose we have SPF 2 (does that exist?). Anyway, that would block
out 50% of the UV radiation that causes burning. If you burn after 30 minutes when naked as the
day you were born (without any sunscreen), you could stay out for an hour – twice as long – with
SPF 2. However, please do try any naked bathing at home, not here. SPF 4 would block out 75%
of the harmful radiation, so you could stay out in the sun four times longer…but it cuts out only
25% more of the incoming UV rays than SPF 2 will do, correct? SPF 8 means you can stay out 8
times longer, but only cuts out, well, let’s see how much more…

1
SPF 2 cuts out 1 − = 50% of the incoming UV radiation.
2

1
SPF 4 cuts out 1 − = 75% of the incoming UV radiation.
4

1
SPF 8 cuts out 1 − = 87.5% of the incoming UV radiation.
8

1
SPF 16 cuts out 1 − = 93.75% of the incoming UV radiation.
16

You get the idea.

1
Following this pattern, SPF X cuts out a fraction 1 − of the incoming UV radiation.
X

But we can examine this from another point of view. At the time of writing I have just completed
chapter four in our Math 162 textbook; the chapter on exponentials and logarithms. I thought it
might be useful to demonstrate how these topics can be applied to the discussion above. From
the list above we see that the fractions of UV radiation blocked by SPF 2, 4, 8, 16 can be written
respectively as

1 1 1 1
1− , 1− 2 , 1− 3 , 1− 4 .
2 2 2 2

Therefore, for SPF X the corresponding fraction of blocked radiation may be written in the form
1
1− n
, where X = 2n. Taking logarithms to base 2 we find that n = log 2 X , or, using the change
2
log X
of base formula with common logarithms, n = .
log 2

Let’s now go back and compare X = 15 and 30.

log15 1.176 1
For SPF 15, n = ≈ ≈ 3.9, so 1 − 3.9 ≈ 0.933 or 93.3% of the harmful radiation is
log 2 0.301 2
1
blocked. Of course, we could have just calculated 1 − ≈ 0.933 to get this result – but where
15
would be the fun in that?

log 30 1.477 1
For SPF 30, n = ≈ ≈ 4.9, so 1 − 4.9 ≈ 0.967 or 96.7% of the harmful radiation is
log 2 0.301 2
blocked. This is a difference of 3.4 percentage points! Again, “we don’t need no stinkin’ logs” to
1
do this, because 1 − ≈ 0.967.
30

Just for fun, consider SPF 100 (if that exists!).

log100 2 1
In this case n = ≈ ≈ 6.6, so 1 − 6.6 ≈ 0.99 or 99% of the harmful radiation is
log 2 0.301 2
1
blocked. But you knew that, because 1 − = 0.99. ☺
100

I hope you find this interesting!

John A. Adam