Derivative of inverse function at x=0

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the derivative of the inverse function of f(x) = x + ln(x+1) at x=0, with the condition that f(0) = 0. Participants explore the existence of the inverse function and the implications of differentiability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the method of finding the inverse function by switching x and y, with some expressing uncertainty about the existence of the inverse. Others question the validity of using the derivative of f at x=0 to find the derivative of the inverse. There are also discussions about the implications of the function's behavior and the conditions under which the inverse exists.

Discussion Status

Some participants express confidence that the inverse exists, while others remain skeptical, suggesting that the problem may be misleading. There is a mix of interpretations regarding the relationship between f and its inverse, with some participants providing guidance on how to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of verifying the value of f^(-1)(0) and clarify that it should not be confused with the multiplicative inverse. The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding regarding the properties of inverse functions and their derivatives.

feathermoon
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Derivative of inverse function at x=0 [SOLVED]

Homework Statement



Let f(x) = x + Ln(x+1), x > -1

Find [itex]\frac{d}{dx}[/itex] [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] [itex]|_{x=0}[/itex]; Note that f(0) = 0

Homework Equations



[itex](f^{-1})'[/itex](x) = [itex]\frac{1}{f^{'}(f^{-1}(x))}[/itex]

(or)

[itex]\frac{dx}{dy}[/itex] = [itex]1/\frac{dy}{dx}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I attempted to find the inverse of f(x) by switching x & y and solving for y. This wouldn't work so I assume the function has no inverse.

I've read that if [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is differentiable at x, the slope of the tangent line will be given by the value of the derivative of [itex]f^{-1}[/itex]at x. Since the graph of [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is obtained from the graph of f by reflection across y=x, the same is true for the tangent lines.

Then, would finding the derivative of f(x=0),

f'(x) = 1 + ([itex]\frac{1}{x+1}[/itex])(1)
f'(x=0) = 1 + [itex]\frac{1}{1+0}[/itex] = 2

and then flipping it for its inverse [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex] be a legitimate means of finding the first derivative of the inverse of f(x) at point x=0 (even if I'm not sure the inverse exists)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok then, you only have to find f^(-1)(0). You don't need to find f^(-1)(x) for any x. What's f^(-1)(0)?
 
feathermoon said:

Homework Statement



Let f(x) = x + Ln(x+1), x > -1

Find [itex]\frac{d}{dx}[/itex] [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] [itex]|_{x=0}[/itex]; Note that f(0) = 0

Homework Equations



[itex](f^{-1})'[/itex](x) = [itex]\frac{1}{f^{'}(f^{-1}(x))}[/itex]

(or)

[itex]\frac{dx}{dy}[/itex] = [itex]1/\frac{dy}{dx}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I attempted to find the inverse of f(x) by switching x & y and solving for y. This wouldn't work so I assume the function has no inverse.

I've read that if [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is differentiable at x, the slope of the tangent line will be given by the value of the derivative of [itex]f^{-1}[/itex]at x. Since the graph of [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is obtained from the graph of f by reflection across y=x, the same is true for the tangent lines.

Then, would finding the derivative of f(x=0),

f'(x) = 1 + ([itex]\frac{1}{x+1}[/itex])(1)
f'(x=0) = 1 + [itex]\frac{1}{1+0}[/itex] = 2

and then flipping it for its inverse [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex] be a legitimate means of finding the first derivative of the inverse of f(x) at point x=0 (even if I'm not sure the inverse exists)?

Ok, you've got it. I'm pretty sure the inverse does exist. f'(x)>0 for x>(-1).
 
Dick said:
Ok then, you only have to find f^(-1)(0). You don't need to find f^(-1)(x) for any x. What's f^(-1)(0)?

If you mean I just find

f(x=0) = 0 + ln(1)

and take its inverse,

1/0 DNE

and I don't get anywhere.

The more I look at it I believe that the inverse just DNE and this problem is a trap.
 
Dick said:
Ok, you've got it. I'm pretty sure the inverse does exist. f'(x)>0 for x>(-1).

Ok, so the way I did it seems to be the only possible way to arrive at a solution? I worried about it, because I've tried the method in a test problem that I could do normally with no success:

Let f(x)= 2x^2-2, x is greater than or equal to zero.

Find d/dx f-inverse(x)|x=0 [Note than f(1)=0]

Answer: d/dx f-inverse(0)= 1/4

f'(x) = 4x
f'(x=0) = 0
flip for inverse 1/0
(instead of 1/4 as I know the answer to be)
 
feathermoon said:
If you mean I just find

f(x=0) = 0 + ln(1)

and take its inverse,

1/0 DNE

and I don't get anywhere.

The more I look at it I believe that the inverse just DNE and this problem is a trap.

No, f^(-1)(0) is supposed to be the inverse function, not 1/f(0). f^(-1)(0)=0. You just did it correctly, why are you retracting that?
 
feathermoon said:
Ok, so the way I did it seems to be the only possible way to arrive at a solution? I worried about it, because I've tried the method in a test problem that I could do normally with no success:

Let f(x)= 2x^2-2, x is greater than or equal to zero.

Find d/dx f-inverse(x)|x=0 [Note than f(1)=0]

Answer: d/dx f-inverse(0)= 1/4

f'(x) = 4x
f'(x=0) = 0
flip for inverse 1/0
(instead of 1/4 as I know the answer to be)

f^(-1)(0)=1. f'(1)=4. 1/f'(f^(-1)(0))=1/f'(1)=1/4. So I'm not sure what is worrying you.
 
Dick said:
f^(-1)(0)=1. f'(1)=4. 1/f'(f^(-1)(0))=1/f'(1)=1/4. So I'm not sure what is worrying you.

I see. I'm just having trouble finding an inverse for the original problem, and its throwing me off.

Wolfram gave me an inverse using the product log function, which I know isn't expected in this course.

Can I ask how you verified f^(-1)(0)=0? I understand everything else you've said and can finish from there.
 
feathermoon said:
I see. I'm just having trouble finding an inverse for the original problem, and its throwing me off.

Wolfram gave me an inverse using the product log function, which I know isn't expected in this course.

Can I ask how you verified f^(-1)(0)=0? I understand everything else you've said and can finish from there.

I'm assuming you switched back to the first problem. If f(x)=x + ln(x+1), then f(0)=0, so f^(-1)(0)=0, right?
 
  • #10
Dick said:
I'm assuming you switched back to the first problem. If f(x)=x + ln(x+1), then f(0)=0, so f^(-1)(0)=0, right?

Yes, original problem. I see, you're finding the reflection of the point f(0)=0 across y=x (so the point (0,0)). I was making the mistake of trying to use a multiplicative inverse. I think I've got it now, thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K