Can Limits Inside Irrational Exponents Be Proven?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the question of whether limits can be taken inside irrational exponents, specifically for sequences and functions. Participants explore the validity of this approach and seek to understand the conditions under which it may hold true.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the limit can be taken inside an irrational exponent for sequences and functions, presenting two cases for consideration.
  • Another participant suggests that the assumption of limits existing for natural exponents may not directly apply to irrational exponents, using the sequence \( a_n = (-1)^n \) as an example of potential failure.
  • There is a discussion about the need to clearly define what is meant by \( a_n^p \) when \( p \) is irrational, indicating the importance of foundational definitions and assumptions.
  • A later reply introduces the idea that for irrational \( p \), \( x^p \) can be expressed as \( \exp{(p \log x)} \), noting the continuity of the logarithm and exponential functions as a potential pathway to understanding the limits.
  • Another participant expresses a realization about the continuity of the functions involved, suggesting that they may have found clarity on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether limits can be taken inside irrational exponents. Multiple viewpoints are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the conditions necessary for such an approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for careful definitions and assumptions when discussing limits with irrational exponents, indicating that the discussion may depend on the specific properties of the sequences or functions involved.

sutupidmath
Messages
1,629
Reaction score
4
limit proof??

well what i am trying to understand,actually proof is if we can get with the limit inside a power (exponent) if the exponent is irrational.
Say we have any sequence (a_n) or any function f(x), let p be irrational then can we do the following, if yes why, if not why?

1. for the sequence

l
[tex]\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} (a_n)^{p} =(\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} a_n)^{p}[/tex] ?
and
2.[tex]\lim_{\substack{\\x\rightarrow x_o}} (f(x))^{p} =(\lim_{\substack{\\x\rightarrow x_o}} f(x))^{p}[/tex]

I know how to prove this but only when p is from naturals. HOwever i have never come across any such a problem. Only today suddenly this idea crossed my mind, so i thought i might get some suggesstions here.
So what is the proper answer to this??


thnx in advance

P.S if you could tell me where i could find a proof for this, i would be really grateful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(Sorry, this post isn't planning to add much, I'm just rambling a little to see what I come up with).

So for natrual numbers it's pretty simple assuming that:

[tex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_na_n = \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right) \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)[/tex]

First of all, I want to point out that this may not be true, take the sequence an = (-1)n

So do you have to make a simmilar assumption with p as an irrational? I think so, I also think you have to clearly define what you're talk about when you mean anp where p is irrational, it's probabily wise to go back to that definition and try and build it up from there, clearly stating any assumptions.
 
Zurtex said:
(Sorry, this post isn't planning to add much, I'm just rambling a little to see what I come up with).

So for natrual numbers it's pretty simple assuming that:

[tex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_na_n = \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right) \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)[/tex]

First of all, I want to point out that this may not be true, take the sequence an = (-1)n

So do you have to make a simmilar assumption with p as an irrational? I think so, I also think you have to clearly define what you're talk about when you mean anp where p is irrational, it's probabily wise to go back to that definition and try and build it up from there, clearly stating any assumptions.

I am assuming that the limit of the sequence (a_n) actually exists, when p is natural, but what for example when p is irrational, this is what i am trying to show. let say a_n=(2n-1)/(n+1), so what can we say now for the limit

[tex]\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} (a_n)^{p} =(\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} a_n)^{p}[/tex]

when p is natural i can clearly go like this, as u stated

[tex]\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} (a_n)^{p} =\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_na_na_n ...a_n = \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right) \left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)\left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)\left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)...\left( \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_n \right)=(\lim_{\substack{\\n\rightarrow \infty}} a_n)^{p}[/tex]

But again i cannot figure out how to do it when we have p irrational?? I can clearly not performe the same thing as i did above assuming that p natural.
 
Last edited:
Follow Zurtex's advice: what is x^p for p irrational? It is exp{p logx}, and log is continuous, multiplication by p is continuous, and exp is continuous.
 
matt grime said:
Follow Zurtex's advice: what is x^p for p irrational? It is exp{p logx}, and log is continuous, multiplication by p is continuous, and exp is continuous.

ohoho

I think i need to be much more vigilent in the future. I think i got it now.

Many thanks to u guys.

P.s. If by any chance,in the future, i might encounter any other problems, or need further clarifications, concerning these kind of problems, i will be back. I hope u won't mind.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K