Problems with some multivariable calc

  • Thread starter Thread starter mramadan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multivariable
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around two problems related to multivariable calculus, specifically focusing on the Epsilon-Delta definition of limits and evaluating a limit involving a series. The original poster expresses difficulty in proving their conjectured answer for the limit and seeks assistance.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the Epsilon-Delta definition of limits and its application to the given function. There is also a discussion on interpreting a limit involving a series, with some participants questioning whether the problem is truly multivariable calculus.

Discussion Status

Some participants have confirmed the interpretations of the problems, while others provide insights into the relationship between the limit and integration concepts, suggesting that the problems may be simpler than initially thought. There is an ongoing exploration of the methods involved without reaching a consensus on the best approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problems may not align with the expected multivariable calculus content, raising questions about the classification of the problems. The original poster's confidence in their answer is also mentioned, but the need for proof remains a point of discussion.

mramadan
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone, our teacher assigned us 15 pretty tough problems to finish by the end of the year and my partner and I have gotten through all but these last two, which none of the other teachers at school can figure out either. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

In the (Epsilon , Delta) definition of the limit (formal definition), limit as x -> c of f(x) = L, let f(x) = x^3 + 3x^2 - x + 1, and let c = 2. Find the least upper bound on delta so that f(x) is bounded within epsilon of L for all sufficiently small epsilon > 0.


Evaluate the limit (bear with me because I don't know how to insert math symbols, so I'll type it out),

limit as n -> infinity of (the series from k = 1 to k = n [ (1 + (2k) / n) ^ 2 (2 / n)]).

I'm 99.99% sure the answer is 26/3 (from the graphing), but I'm not sure how to prove it. Thanks in advance everyone!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's get something we can work with:

In the (Epsilon , Delta) definition of the limit (formal definition), limit as x -> c of f(x) = L, let f(x) = x^3 + 3x^2 - x + 1, and let c = 2. Find the least upper bound on delta so that f(x) is bounded within epsilon of L for all sufficiently small epsilon > 0.
[tex]f(x) = x^3 + 3x^2 - x + 1[/tex]

[tex]c = 2[/tex]

[tex]0 < |x - c| < \delta[/tex]

[tex]|f(x) - L| < \epsilon[/tex]


limit as n -> infinity of (the series from k = 1 to k = n [ (1 + (2k) / n) ^ 2 (2 / n)]).
[tex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \sum_{k=1}^n \left [ \left (1 + \frac{2k}{n} \right )^2 \left ( \frac{2}{n} \right ) \right ][/tex]

You're going to have to let us know if this is the right interpretation.
 
Last edited:
Perfect...both are correct.
 
Last edited:
First off, this all looks like single-variable calculus, not multi, right? Anyways, this one is quite easy if you're familiar with integration and the Riemann sum.

[tex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \sum_{k=1}^n \left [ \left (1 + \frac{2k}{n} \right )^2 \left ( \frac{2}{n} \right ) \right ][/tex]

When we integrate, it can be seen as taking a function, and cutting the area underneath it into rectangles, and summing the areas of the rectangles as the number of rectangles approaches infinity (and the width approaches zero).

So, given n rectangles, the area under the curve would be the sum of the areas of all the rectangles. Each rectangle has a uniform width. Let's say we're integrating from x=a to x=b. So, with n rectangles, each rectangle will have a width of (b-a)/n. That's where the (2/n) in the sum comes from. Now, each rectangle has a height. The height is normally some function of [itex]x_i[/itex] (or you may have seen [itex]x^*[/itex]) which would be something like the midpoint of the subinterval. So, the height is [itex]f(x^*)[/itex]

It looks to me that we have the following:

[tex]\int_{1}^3 x^2 dx = \frac{26}{3}[/tex]

Seems like your graphing was right. Start with n = 5, and make the rectangles such that the height of a rectangle on the interval [m,n] is f(n). This is called the Right-Endpoint Method (or something like that). Remember, the height of a rectangle is [itex]f(x^*)[/itex] and you should find that in general, if looking at an overall interval of [a,b], that:

[tex]x^* = a + \frac{k(b - a)}{n}[/tex]

Hopefully, if you consider all this it will all come together and make sense, I don't know if I did the best job of explaining it though.
 
[tex]\int_a^b f(x) dx = \lim _{n \rightarrow \infty} \sum _{i=1} ^n f(x_i) \left ( \frac{b-a}{n} \right ) \mbox { where } x_i = a\ +\ \frac{k(b - a)}{n}[/tex]

[tex]\mbox{when using the Right Endpoint Method}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K