How does this limit problem follow from limit rules?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter suffian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a limit problem involving the evaluation of a limit as x approaches zero, specifically focusing on how to apply limit rules and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus without performing direct integration or using L'Hôpital's rule.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an initial approach to the limit problem, breaking down the expression and suggesting that the average value of the integrated function approaches a certain value as x approaches zero.
  • Another participant suggests that the initial approach would have worked if the expression had been structured differently, specifically mentioning the need to rewrite the integral to apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus effectively.
  • A subsequent reply proposes a substitution to change the limits of integration, leading to a new formulation of the limit that aligns with the average value of the function inside the integral.
  • Another participant acknowledges the validity of the new approach and shares their own method of substitution, providing a detailed breakdown of how the integral transforms under the new variable.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of using a continuous and invertible function for changing the limit variable, asserting that this condition is sufficient for the operation performed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the validity of the final answer but explore different methods to arrive at it. There is no consensus on the best approach, as multiple strategies are discussed and refined throughout the thread.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the limitations of their approaches, such as the need for specific conditions on the functions used for substitutions and the avoidance of direct integration or L'Hôpital's rule.

suffian
[SOLVED] A limit problem

I just need some help showing how this limit systematically follows from the limit rules:

Code:
           # x     2
      1   #       t           1
lim  ---  #  ---------- dt = ---
x->0   3  #     2             3
      x  # 0   t  + 1

My first chain of thought led to breaking the expression up as follows:
1/x^2 * ( 1/x * Integral[0..x, t^2/(t^2+1)] )

Then I just kind of figured that the subexpression on the right was the average value of the function being integrated from 0..x and as x->0 the average value would approach x^2/(x^2+1), which led to:

1/x^2 * x^2/(x^2+1) = 1/(x^2+1)
which would approach one as x approached zero.

But clearly that's wrong (not surprisingly since I made a sketchy move in the middle) since the answer is one-third. Can anyone show me how to do this?

edit: possibly w/o actually integrating because this is an exercise in which you're expected to know the FTofC but not how to integrate that.

edit2: oh, not supposed to no l'hospital's rule either.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your first thought would have worked if you only had 1/x out front instead of 1/x3. (because your limit would essentially be a derivative)

So the trick is to rewrite it in a form in which the fundamental theorem of calculus applies! In particular, if you can do a substitution in the integral so the bounds of integration are from 0 to x3, then you can use your thought to evaluate the limit.
 
Okay, I think this works then.

I tried to change Integral[0..x, t2/(t2+1)] into Integral[0..x3, f(t)]

Integral[0..x, t2/(t2+1)] = Integral[0..x3, f(t)]
d/dx[ Integral[0..x, t2/(t2+1)] ] = d/dx[ Integral[0..x3, f(t)] ]
x2/(x2 + 1) = f(x3).3x2
f(x3) = 1/(3(x2+1)), (x != 0)
f(x) = 1/(3(x2/3+1))

so..
Limit[ x->0, 1/x3 Integral[0..x3, 1/(3(t2/3+1))] ]

Which is the average value of the function inside the integral from 0..x3, which approaches f(0) as x approaches zero, which would be 1/3. I hope that's a sufficient way to solve the problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's an interesting way to change the limits! But you got the right answer in the end, I'm going to have to look at it and see why it works; I never thought to do it that way.

Incidentally, I was thinking doing the substitution t = s1/3. t = x => s = x3, t = 0 => s = 0, and the integral became

∫0..x3 s2/3 / (s2/3 + 1) * (1/3) s-2/3 ds

which is precisely the integral you got.


Anyways, then you're left with the form:

L = limx->0 1/x3 &int0..x3 g(s) ds

We are also permitted to substitute in the limit variable, and I will do so to make things simpler. x3 = y

L = limy->0 1/y &int0..y g(s) ds

By the fundamental theorem of calculus, if G(s) is the antiderivative of g(s):

L = limy->0 (G(y) - G(0)) / y = G'(0) = g(0)

So that's how you rigorously justify your last step.
 
Thanks!
 
I guess, for the sake of completeness, I should specify that when I changed the limit variable, I had to use a function that is continuous and invertible near x = 0 (I think that alone is sufficient to permit the operation). y(x) = x1/3 satisfies that condition.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K