Determine the limit of this function

  • Thread starter Thread starter raopeng
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Limit
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the limit of the function x^x as x approaches 0. This topic falls under the subject area of limits in mathematical analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore various methods to evaluate the limit, including rewriting the expression using exponential functions and logarithms. Some express concern about the complexity of their approaches, particularly regarding the use of L'Hospital's Rule, and seek simpler alternatives. Others suggest different substitutions and reasoning to avoid advanced techniques.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing their thoughts on the validity of different approaches. Some have provided insights into alternative methods that do not rely on L'Hospital's Rule, while others are still questioning the assumptions and definitions involved in the limit evaluation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem appears in a chapter prior to the introduction of L'Hospital's Theorem, leading to speculation about the author's intended methods for solving the limit. There is also mention of the need for additional proofs when transitioning between different forms of the limit.

raopeng
Messages
83
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


find the limit of [itex]x^x[/itex]when x approaches 0.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I am currently revising my Mathematical Analysis and this question pops up. The author only expects the reader to use the most fundamental knowledge of the limit, so I feel my method counts as "cheating"(rewriting as [itex]e^{x lnx}, lim x lnx= 0[/itex]using the L'Hospital's Rule so the limit is 1). Is there an approach that involves "less complicated knowledge" because I really wish to fully grasp every notion of basic math? Thank you...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's perfectly valid- you are using the the fact that exponential is a continuous function. That is, [itex]\lim_{x\to 0} e^{f(x)}= e^{\lim_{x\to 0} f(x)}[/itex]. [itex]x^x= e^{x ln(x)}[/itex] and [itex]x ln(x)[/itex] goes to 0 as you say. The limit of [itex]x^cx[/itex] is [itex]e^0= 1[/itex].
 
Thanks for the reply. That's my idea exactly. But that problem appears in a chapter well before the author introduces the L'Hospital's Theorem so there must be another way to do it... I am torturing myself...
 
raopeng said:
Thanks for the reply. That's my idea exactly. But that problem appears in a chapter well before the author introduces the L'Hospital's Theorem so there must be another way to do it... I am torturing myself...
I would check to see if the author has discussed this limit in the chapter you're in: ## \lim_{x \to 0} x ln(x)##. Since he doesn't present L'Hopital's Rule until later, it's possible he has said something about this limit, which is the crux of the problem you're trying to solve.
 
You don't really need l'Hopital for [itex] \lim_{x\rightarrow 0} {xlnx}[/itex]. I would let [itex]x = e^{-n}[/itex] and take the limit as n→∞.
[itex]\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} {e^{-n}ln(e^{-n})} = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} {\frac {-n}{e^n}}[/itex]. I guess this limit is technically a l'Hopital problem, but it isn't hard to see that it goes to zero.
 
Thank you, HS-Scientist, that's what I later did. It is a bit tedious because jumping from n to x also takes an extra proof so maybe in the end L'Hopital law is easier.
 
HS-Scientist said:
You don't really need l'Hopital for [itex] \lim_{x\rightarrow 0} {xlnx}[/itex]. I would let [itex]x = e^{-n}[/itex] and take the limit as n→∞.
[itex]\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} {e^{-n}ln(e^{-n})} = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} {\frac {-n}{e^n}}[/itex]. I guess this limit is technically a l'Hopital problem, but it isn't hard to see that it goes to zero.
It's not obvious to me that the latter limit is zero. This limit is an indeterminate form [-∞/∞], which means that L'Hopital's Rule applies, so how did you evaluate the limit without using L'H?
 
Mark44 said:
It's not obvious to me that the latter limit is zero. This limit is an indeterminate form [-∞/∞], which means that L'Hopital's Rule applies, so how did you evaluate the limit without using L'H?

If your definition of e^x is its power series, then this is rather trivial. You can also use the idea that e^x is increasing faster than x without referencing l'Hopital. If we consider [itex]\frac{x}{e^x}[/itex] and replace x with x+r for any positive r>ln2 we get [itex]\frac{x+r}{e^re^x}[/itex]. The numerator has increased by a factor of 1+r/x and the denominator by a factor of e^r, so we multiplied the fraction by [itex]\frac{1+r/x}{e^r}[/itex]. Now for all x>(1+r)/2 (we can assume that this is the case because r is a constant and we can make x as large as we like), this ratio is smaller than 2/e^r. As long as we have r>ln2, this ratio is also less than one. So each time we increase x by r, we multiply it by something that is smaller than a constant which is less than one, so it must go to zero as we add r to the input an arbitrarily large number of times.

Edit: This argument makes an assumption which I forgot to state explicitly; namely that if the sequence [itex]a_1,a_2,...a_n...[/itex] goes to zero, then so does a function f such that [itex]f(n)=a_n[/itex] (In my argument, a_n is n/e^n evaluated at x,x+r...) This is not true in general, but here it works because of r being arbitrary (as long as it >ln2). This is because f(x) is always bounded from above by the smallest value of f more than ln2 less than x. So every time x is incremented by r, there is a new maximum value of f (smaller than the previous one) for all x greater than this new x.
 
Last edited:
My method is similar to HS-Scientist. It first starts from the statement that [itex]lim\frac{n}{a^n}=0[/itex] where a > 0 and n is an integer, whose proof uses the fact that the sequence is bounded below and [itex]lim \frac{a^{n+1}}{a^n}=\frac{1}{a}<1[/itex]. And then it passes to the continuous case so for any x we can take the integer part of it and construct two terms which sandwich x/e^x and have a common limit 0. Hence x/e^x approaches 0. But indeed it is too tedious..
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K