A question regarding the definition of e

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical constant e, defined as e = lim (n→∞) (1 + 1/n)^n. The variable 'n' is used as a bound variable to denote the sequence of integers approaching infinity, despite the formula being applicable for all real numbers. The notation emphasizes the limit process, which is crucial for understanding the convergence towards e. The conversation highlights that while e can be approached through integer values of n, its definition is rooted in the concept of limits rather than specific values.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with sequences and convergence
  • Basic knowledge of exponential functions
  • Concept of bound versus free variables in mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the formal definition of limits in calculus
  • Explore the properties of exponential functions and their applications
  • Learn about sequences and series, focusing on convergence criteria
  • Investigate the relationship between e and continuous compounding in finance
USEFUL FOR

Students of calculus, mathematicians, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of limits and exponential growth will benefit from this discussion.

SafiBTA
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


In writing the definition of ##e## i.e. ##e=\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n##, why do we denote the variable by 'n' despite the fact that the formula holds for n∈(-∞,∞)? Is there any specific reason behind this notation i.e. does the variable have anything to do with positive integers (which we normally use 'n' for)?

Homework Equations


##e=\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n##

The Attempt at a Solution


I see no clue as to why is this so.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The n in that expression for e is not a free variable. It is a bound variable. It makes no sense to talk about the formula holding for some particular value of n. The n in the formula has a limited scope and is not defined at all outside of that scope.

Have you ever encountered a formal definition for "limit"? In your coursework, have you encountered statements such as "there exists an x in R such that for all n in N, ..."
 
The limit describes a sequence of numbers that as n increases becomes closer and closer to e.

n=1 and the expr=2
n=2 and the expr=2.2
n=3 and the expr=2.37
n=4 and the expr=2.44
...
n approaches infinity expr approaches e
 
To get a bit more pedantic, the "limit" is the single, fixed numeric value (if one exists) that the sequence approaches.
 
SafiBTA said:
In writing the definition of ##e## i.e. ##e=\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n##, why do we denote the variable by 'n' despite the fact that the formula holds for n∈(-∞,∞)? Is there any specific reason behind this notation i.e. does the variable have anything to do with positive integers (which we normally use 'n' for)?
By "formula" I presume you mean this expression: (1 + 1/n)n. Clearly it is not defined for n = 0. The "notation," as you called it, is a limit, and the expression whose limit is being taken has different values for different values of n (integer values). As n gets larger, the value of the expression (1 + 1/n)n gets closer to the number e.
 
SafiBTA said:

Homework Statement


In writing the definition of ##e## i.e. ##e=\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n##, why do we denote the variable by 'n' despite the fact that the formula holds for n∈(-∞,∞)? Is there any specific reason behind this notation i.e. does the variable have anything to do with positive integers (which we normally use 'n' for)?

Homework Equations


##e=\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n##

The Attempt at a Solution


I see no clue as to why is this so.

It is true that
e = \lim_{x \to \infty} \left( 1 + \frac{1}{x} \right)^x
but that is a theorem, rather than a definition.

The point is that concepts/objects need to be defined before they are used (in a strictly logical approach, at least), so that although one can define and understand ##a^n## for real ##a## and integer (or even rational) ##n##, ##a^x## for real ##x## is trickier and more involved to get at. Sometimes, the definitions related to ##a^x## proceed through the use of the number ##e## itself, where it is understood that this ##e## is the one obtained by the usual integer limit.
 
jedishrfu said:
The limit describes a sequence of numbers that as n increases becomes closer and closer to e.

n=1 and the expr=2
n=2 and the expr=2.2
n=3 and the expr=2.37
n=4 and the expr=2.44
...
n approaches infinity expr approaches
Suppose there is a bank A which gives 100%interest per annum , and bank Bgives 100 percent but compounded twice in a year,and bank C gives 100 percent per annum but compounded thrice(i,e every for months ) and so on...
Now Dollar 1 deposited in each of these banks will be 2,(1plus1/2)power2,(1plus1/3) power3 and so on .
Ultimately in this way a hypothetical bank which compounds interest every moment will give you back Dollars e!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K