1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Approximation of a function in limit of small and large x

  1. Aug 2, 2012 #1
    Hi all,

    I'm having a bit of trouble getting my head round approximations to a function in the limit of small and large values of the x parameter. The function is:

    [itex]y = x\left\{ {\left[ {1 + \left( {{1 \over x}} \right)^2 } \right]^{{1 \over 2}} - 1} \right\}[/itex]

    The paper I'm reading says y becomes independent of x for small values of x. For large values of x, y becomes proportional to (1/x). Has anyone got any ideas of how this can be shown algebraically? I haven't had to do this for a while!

  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 2, 2012 #2

    Let us look at

    When [itex]\,x\to 0\,[/itex] , both numerator and denominator above go to [itex]\,\pm \infty[/itex] , so applying L'Hospital we get:

    [tex]\lim_{x\to 0}h(x)=\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{-\frac{1}{x^3}\left(1+\frac{1}{x^2}\right)^{-1/2}}{-\frac{1}{x^2}}=\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{1}{x\left(1+\frac{1}{x^2}\right)^{1/2}}=\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{1}{\left(x^2+1\right)^{1/2}}=1[/tex]

    the above being possible if [itex]\,x>0\,\,,\,i.e.\,\,\lim_{x\to 0^+}\,[/itex] . If we take the limit from the left just

    multiply by [itex]\,-1\,[/itex] after the 3rd. equality above and proceed then as before. The limit then is [itex]\,-1[/itex] .

    This shows the paper you're reading is wrong as the value approached definitely depends on
    whether x is "very small",

    positive or negative . It's easy to see that has x becomes larger and larger the expression in the square root

    becomes closer to 1.

    Doing exactly the same as above in the case [itex]\,x\to\infty\,[/itex] , we get the limit is now zero, but the

    thing about "proporcionality" perhaps means that [itex]\,|h(x)|\leq\frac{M}{x}\,\,\,,\,\,as\,\,\,x \to \infty\,\,,\,M=\,[/itex] a constant. Check this.

  4. Aug 2, 2012 #3


    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    You can calculate the taylor expansion for h(x) at x=0 and for h(1/x) at 1/x=0 - in both cases, use the limit value where h is not well-defined. If x cannot be negative, this limit exists.

    Hand-wavy way for small x: (1+z)^(1/2) = 1+z/2+O(z^2) for small z, therefore
    [itex]h(x) = x \left(\frac{1}{x}(1+x^2)^{1/2}-1\right) = x\left(\frac{1}{x}(1+\frac{x^2}{2}+O(x^4))-1\right)=1-x+\frac{x^2}{2}+O(x^4)[/itex]
    Well, I would not call this "independent of x", the single "-x" does not fit to this.
    Another way would be to derive your whole equation. If the limit of the derivative is 0 (it is not, unless I made a mistake), you could call this "independent of x".

    And small 1/x:
    [itex]h(x)=x \left(1+\frac{1}{x^2}+O(\frac{1}{x^4})-1\right) = \frac{1}{x} + O(\frac{1}{x^3})[/itex]
    Another way here would be to show that y*x approaches a constant for x->infinity.

    @DonAntonio: This would be an upper limit, not a proportionality.
  5. Aug 5, 2012 #4
    Isn't that the same as:

    [itex]f(x) = x \times \sqrt {1 + \left( {{1 \over x}} \right)^2 } - x[/itex]

    which is equal to:

    [itex]f(x) = \sqrt {x^2 + x^2 \times\left( {{1 \over x^2}} \right) } - x[/itex]

    which is equal to:

    [itex]f(x) = \sqrt {x^2 + 1 } - x[/itex]

    Which leads us to the conclusions:
    [tex]\lim_{x\to\infty} \sqrt {x^2 + 1 } - x =0[/tex]
    [tex]\lim_{x\to 0} \sqrt {x^2 + 1 } - x = 1[/tex]
  6. Aug 5, 2012 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    x can be negative so the next line is wrong. Remember [itex]\sqrt{x^2} = |x|[/itex]
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook