Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

In the preface to William Dunham's book "Euler: The Master of Us All", he wrote,

 

[math]\lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{1-x^t}{t} = -\ln x[/math] for [math]x > 0[/math]

 

Can anyone tell me how he got that result?

Edited by murshid
Posted

I will give you a hint.

 

Series expand [math]x^{t}[/math] about [math]t=0[/math] to first order in [math]t[/math] (you can go higher but that is all we will need). Put that expression into your limit and see what you get.

 

The only tricky thing here is working out what [math]\frac{\partial }{\partial t} x^{t}[/math] is. Either look it up, or see if you can prove it.

 

Let us know how you get on.

Posted (edited)

I will give you a hint.

 

Series expand [math]x^{t}[/math] about [math]t=0[/math] to first order in [math]t[/math] (you can go higher but that is all we will need). Put that expression into your limit and see what you get.

 

The only tricky thing here is working out what [math]\frac{\partial }{\partial t} x^{t}[/math] is. Either look it up, or see if you can prove it.

 

Let us know how you get on.

I managed to solve it using L'Hopital's rule.

 

[math]\frac{d}{dt} x^{t} = x^t \ln x[/math] (I got it by letting [math]y = x^t[/math], which is equivalent to [math]\ln y = t \ln x[/math], and then differentiating both sides with respect to t).

 

But what did you mean by Series expand [math]x^{t}[/math]? Did you mean the Taylor/Maclaurin Series expansion? I have been out of touch with calculus for the last few years. So it would really help if you could give me the series expansion of [math]x^{t}[/math] about [math]t = 0[/math].

Edited by murshid
Posted

I managed to solve it using L'Hopital's rule.

 

[math]\frac{d}{dt} x^{t} = x^t \ln x[/math]

 

But what did you mean by Series expand [math]x^{t}[/math]? Did you mean the Taylor/Maclaurin Series expansion? I have been out of touch with calculus for the last few years. So it would really help if you could give me the series expansion of [math]x^{t}[/math] about [math]t = 0[/math].

 

Right you have got it!

 

Now apply the Maclaurin series up to first order in [math]t[/math]. Near [math]t=0[/math] the function [math]x^{t}[/math] can be approximated by?

 

If you cannot remember the definition of the Taylor/Maclaurin series take a quick look at the Wikipedia entry.

Posted (edited)

Right you have got it!

 

Now apply the Maclaurin series up to first order in [math]t[/math]. Near [math]t=0[/math] the function [math]x^{t}[/math] can be approximated by?

 

If you cannot remember the definition of the Taylor/Maclaurin series take a quick look at the Wikipedia entry.

I think I've got it now. The expansion of [math]x^t[/math] near [math]t = 0[/math] is:

 

[math]1 + \frac{\ln x}{1}t + \frac{(\ln x)^2}{2}t^2 + \frac{(\ln x)^3}{6}t^3 + \cdots[/math]

 

Therefore,

 

[math] \lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{1-x^t}{t} [/math]

 

[math]= \lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{- \frac{\ln x}{1}t - \frac{\left (\ln x\right )^2}{2}t^2 - \frac{\left (\ln x\right )^3}{6}t^3 - \cdots}{t} [/math]

 

[math]= \lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} - \frac{\ln x}{1} - \frac{\left (\ln x\right )^2}{2}t - \frac{\left (\ln x\right )^3}{6}t^2 - \cdots [/math]

 

[math]= - \ln x [/math]

Edited by murshid
Posted

I have had similar problems with LaTeX on here, minus signs have given me trouble. Try leaving more of a space between the number and the !.

Posted (edited)

I have had similar problems with LaTeX on here, minus signs have given me trouble. Try leaving more of a space between the number and the !.

I tried that. It doesn't work. For example, [math]\frac{\ln x}{1} [/math] works; but when I put a factorial sign after the '1' in the denominator, I get an error message: [math]\frac{\ln x}{1 !} [/math].

Edited by murshid
Posted (edited)

I have no idea, but the system does not like " ! ". :blink:

Edited by ajb
Posted (edited)

.

I have a question about the original problem:

 

[math]\lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{1-x^t}{t} = -\ln x[/math] for [math]x > 0[/math]

 

Why is it [math]t \rightarrow 0^{+}[/math] instead of [math]t \rightarrow 0^{-}[/math] or [math]t \rightarrow 0[/math]? I don't see why it shouldn't work for either [math]t \rightarrow 0^{-}[/math] or [math]t \rightarrow 0[/math].

Edited by murshid
Posted

The function looks smooth (fixing an x> 0). I think the direction of the limit won't matter.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.