1 vectors and 1 limits problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Icetray
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits Vectors
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around solving two mathematical problems involving vectors and limits. For the first problem, it is established that if vectors A, B, and C are mutually perpendicular and R = pA + qB + rC equals the zero vector, then it follows that p, q, and r must all be zero. In the second problem, the user attempts to show that the derivative f'(0) equals a/(1-k) using the limit definition of differentiation, but faces confusion regarding the treatment of variables. A key point raised is the importance of maintaining consistent variable definitions throughout the limit process. Ultimately, the correct conclusion is that both p, q, and r equal zero in the first problem, and the user is guided toward a clearer understanding of the differentiation limit in the second problem.
Icetray
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

Starting revision for my exams and I can't seem to solve these problems. ):

1. Given that three non zero vectors A, B and C are perpendicular to each other and that the vector R = pA + qB + rC is a zero vector, show that p = q = r = 0


2. In another question, given that f(x) is differenciatable at x = 0 and \frac{Lim}{x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{x} = a, wjere a and k are constants.

b. Show that f'(0) = a/1-k

What I did was take the defination of differenciation:
\frac{Lim}{h->0} \frac{f(x+h) - f(x)}{h}

and I let x = kx, and h = (1-k)x,
\frac{Lim}{(1-k)x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{(1-k)x}

and I did this (assuming that I can write \frac{Lim}{(1-k)x->0} as \frac{Lim}{x->0}

1/(1-k)\frac{Lim}{x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{x} = a/1-k

Is this correct?

Thanks in advance for your help guys!

*Edit* Just realized that I misread the forum title and posted in the wrong one. ):
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Icetray said:
Hi guys,

Starting revision for my exams and I can't seem to solve these problems. ):

1. Given that three non zero vectors A, B and C are perpendicular to each other and that the vector R = pA + qB + rC is a zero vector, show that p = q = r = 0

What can you tell us about the inner products R.A, R.B and R.C??

2. In another question, given that f(x) is differenciatable at x = 0 and \frac{Lim}{x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{x} = a, wjere a and k are constants.

b. Show that f'(0) = a/1-k

What I did was take the defination of differenciation:
\frac{Lim}{h->0} \frac{f(x+h) - f(x)}{h}

and I let x = kx, and h = (1-k)x,
\frac{Lim}{(1-k)x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{(1-k)x}

and I did this (assuming that I can write \frac{Lim}{(1-k)x->0} as \frac{Lim}{x->0}

1/(1-k)\frac{Lim}{x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{x} = a/1-k

Is this correct?

Thanks in advance for your help guys!

*Edit* Just realized that I misread the forum title and posted in the wrong one. ):
[/QUOTE]

No, you can't do that. You took

\frac{Lim}{h->0} \frac{f(x+h) - f(x)}{h}

but the x in there is a constant! But later

\frac{Lim}{(1-k)x->0} \frac{f(x) - f(kx)}{(1-k)x}

your x is suddenly a limit variable.

I'll illustrate it by taking x=2, then you write

\frac{Lim}{h->0} \frac{f(2+h) - f(2)}{h}

this is perfectly valid and it equals f'(2). But then you write

\frac{Lim}{(1-k)2->0} \frac{f(2) - f(k2)}{(1-k)2}

which obviously makes no sense. (1-k)2 -> 0 makes no sense!

I'll give you a hint on how to solve it:

\begin{align}
f^\prime(0)
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{\frac{f(h)-f(0)}{h}}\\
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{ \frac{\frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{h}}{ \frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{f(h)-f(0)}}}\\
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{ \frac{\frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{h}}{ \frac{(f(h)-f(0)) - (f(kh)-f(0))}{f(h)-f(0)}}}\\
\end{align}
 
micromass said:
What can you tell us about the inner products R.A, R.B and R.C??

Oh!

R.R = R.A + R.B + R.C
Since R.R = 0,
R= p = q = r?

micromass said:
I'll give you a hint on how to solve it:

\begin{align}
f^\prime(0)
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{\frac{f(h)-f(0)}{h}}\\
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{ \frac{\frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{h}}{ \frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{f(h)-f(0)}}}\\
&= \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}{ \frac{\frac{f(h)-f(kh)}{h}}{ \frac{(f(h)-f(0)) - (f(kh)-f(0))}{f(h)-f(0)}}}\\
\end{align}

How did you get from the first to the second step? )(Actually I'm lost from that step onwards also)

Anyway thanks for your help so far micromass!
 
R.A = pA.A Since R=0 then R.A=0, however A.A > 0, therefore p=0. Similarly for q and r.
 
Icetray said:
Oh!

R.R = R.A + R.B + R.C
Since R.R = 0,
R= p = q = r?
Why do you say "R.R= 0"?? And "R= p= q= r" makes no sense. R is a vector while p, q, and r are numbers.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Why do you say "R.R= 0"?? And "R= p= q= r" makes no sense. R is a vector while p, q, and r are numbers.

R=0, therefore R.R=0

The second line is a typo - I meant p=q=r=0.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K