Can Limits Avoid Paradoxes in Derivatives and Integrals?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Red_CCF
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivatives Integrals
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of limits in calculus to address paradoxes associated with derivatives and integrals, particularly focusing on the concept of infinitesimals and the potential for undefined expressions like 0/0. Participants explore whether limits can effectively resolve these issues.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that traditional explanations of derivatives and integrals involve infinitesimals, which can lead to paradoxes such as encountering 0/0 when points are brought infinitely close together.
  • Another participant suggests that limits provide a resolution to these paradoxes by avoiding undefined evaluations, illustrating this with the limit of 3^-n as n approaches infinity.
  • A later reply questions whether the limit truly provides an accurate slope calculation, suggesting that the resulting numbers from limits may not be entirely accurate.
  • Another participant clarifies that the result of a limit can be understood as a least upper bound or greatest lower bound, referencing the construction of finite decimal approximations for irrational numbers like pi.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness of limits in resolving paradoxes. While some support the idea that limits can avoid undefined evaluations, others challenge the accuracy of the results obtained through limits.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the definitions of limits and real numbers, as well as the implications of using infinitesimals in calculus. There are unresolved questions regarding the accuracy of limit results in the context of slope calculations.

Red_CCF
Messages
530
Reaction score
0
Hi

I know that the common explanation of derivatives is drawing a secant line through a graph and move one point closer to the other where the space between them is infinitesimal. Similarly, area under a graph can be found by finding the areas of individual rectangles with infinitesimally small width and adding the rectangles' areas together. But I've been reading some material that was assigned by my professor that explains the paradoxes in these common explanations. Ex. as we move two points closer and closer together eventually we would get 0/0 as the slope. Can anyone come up with an explanation that avoids such paradoxes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The traditional resolution of this problem is the limit. In the definition of a limit all evaluations that are undefined are avoided.
examaple
lim_{n->infinity} 3^-n
we never say 3^-infinity=0
we say for 3^-n can be made as close as desired to 3 by taking n sufficiently large

so
[f(x+h)-f(x)]/h can be made close to f'(x) by selecting h small.
 
lurflurf said:
The traditional resolution of this problem is the limit. In the definition of a limit all evaluations that are undefined are avoided.
examaple
lim_{n->infinity} 3^-n
we never say 3^-infinity=0
we say for 3^-n can be made as close as desired to 3 by taking n sufficiently large

so
[f(x+h)-f(x)]/h can be made close to f'(x) by selecting h small.

Oh so with the limit, we simply find the slope of a secant line where the two points are infinitismally close together and as a result we get two non zero numbers for x and y for slope calculations and the slope would not be entirely accurate?
 
Red_CCF said:
Oh so with the limit, we simply find the slope of a secant line where the two points are infinitismally close together and as a result we get two non zero numbers for x and y for slope calculations and the slope would not be entirely accurate?

No. The number that we get out of a limit is the least upper bound (supremum) or greatest lower bound (infimum) of a certain set. The guarantee that such numbers exist is built into the definition of the real numbers. If the number is not a rational number, we can easily construct finite decimal approximations using series. Ie., the decimal digits for pi, which was approached by Archimedes as a supremum of the set of areas of inscribed polygons and infimum of the areas of circumscribed polygons.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K