Derivative of a^x using limit definition

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiation of the function f(x) = 2^x using the limit definition of the derivative. Participants are exploring the properties of the function and the implications of its definition.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to derive the derivative using the limit definition and are questioning how to show that a specific limit equals ln(2). There is also a discussion about the definition of 2^x for real numbers and its differentiability.

Discussion Status

The conversation includes attempts to clarify the definition of 2^x and its properties, with some participants expressing uncertainty about the foundational aspects of the function. There is no explicit consensus, but various interpretations and approaches are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of defining exponential functions for real numbers and the implications for differentiation, with references to continuity and smoothness of the function.

SithsNGiggles
Messages
183
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Sketch and label on the same pair of axes the graphs of y=f(x) and y=f'(x) for ... c) f(x)=2x

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



f(x) = 2x
f'(x) = lim as h→0 (2x+h-2x)/h
= lim as h→0 (2x2h-2x)/h
= lim as h→0 2x(2h-1)/h
= lim as h→0 2x ∙ lim as h→0 (2h-1)/h
= 2x ∙ lim as h→0 (2h-1)/h

I know I have to show that the limit after 2x is equal to ln(2), but how do I do that using this definition?
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SithsNGiggles said:

Homework Statement



Sketch and label on the same pair of axes the graphs of y=f(x) and y=f'(x) for ... c) f(x)=2x

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



f(x) = 2x
f'(x) = lim as h→0 (2x+h-2x)/h
= lim as h→0 (2x2h-2x)/h
= lim as h→0 2x(2h-1)/h
= lim as h→0 2x ∙ lim as h→0 (2h-1)/h
= 2x ∙ lim as h→0 (2h-1)/h

I know I have to show that the limit after 2x is equal to ln(2), but how do I do that using this definition?
Thanks.

I have a question that looks frivolous but is actually serious. What do you mean by 2^x? You know how to define 2^n for positive or negative integers n and how to define 2^r for rational r of the form k/2^n, but what do you mean by 2^x? Most definitions would use logarithms to define it, or else use some limiting process, etc. Related questions: how do you know that 2^x is differentiable? All these issues are easiest if you use logarithms. In that case the answer falls out almost without effort.

RGV
 
I apologize if my answer doesn't satisfy your question, but by 2x I mean the graph that represents 2 to the power of any real number.

As for your relevant question, I know 2x is differentiable because it's continuous while also being a smooth curve with no vertical tangents. I also have previous experience in deriving any base to the power of x, but I'm expected to derive 2x using the limit definition.
 
SithsNGiggles said:
I apologize if my answer doesn't satisfy your question, but by 2x I mean the graph that represents 2 to the power of any real number.

As for your relevant question, I know 2x is differentiable because it's continuous while also being a smooth curve with no vertical tangents. I also have previous experience in deriving any base to the power of x, but I'm expected to derive 2x using the limit definition.

You have completely misunderstood my question. I know what 2^x is supposed to be. My question is more fundamental than that: how do you define it? We know how to define 2^1, 2^2, 2^3, ... and 2^(-1), 2^(-2),..., as well as 2^(1/2), 2^(1/4), 2^(3/4), etc. But how do we define 2^x for general, real values of x? Of course we all know that f(x) = 2^x is continuous, differentiable, etc., but why do we know that? Well, in my case it was because f(x) was defined in an unambiguous way in terms of logarithms and exponentials, from which those properties follow easily. If you define it in some other way, you are left with the thorny problem of actually *proving* what you say; alternatively, you could handwave and hope for the best.

RGV
 
2h = ehln2.

What happens if you write the series expansion for it?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K