How Does the Upper Bound of f^{n+1}(x) Relate to 2^{n + 1} * n! on [-1/2, 1/2]?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Punkyc7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bound Upper bound
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on demonstrating the inequality |f^{n+1}(x)| ≤ 2^{n + 1} * n! for the function f = ln(1/(1-x)) within the interval [-1/2, 1/2]. Participants highlight the importance of differentiating between the order of the derivative and the index of the sum, suggesting clearer notation. They recommend starting with n=0 to verify the inequality and propose using direct differentiation to identify patterns that could facilitate a proof by induction.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Taylor series expansions
  • Knowledge of derivatives and their applications
  • Familiarity with mathematical induction
  • Basic concepts of logarithmic functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore Taylor series for logarithmic functions
  • Learn about mathematical induction proofs in calculus
  • Investigate the properties of derivatives of logarithmic functions
  • Study the relationship between factorial growth and exponential functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, calculus students, and anyone interested in advanced calculus concepts, particularly those dealing with series and inequalities.

Punkyc7
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Let f = ln(\frac{1}{1-x})


show that if x \in [-1/2 , 1/2] then


|f^{n+1}(x)| <= 2^{n + 1} * n!



I am having a hard time seeing how 2^{n + 1} * n! comes into play.


I have that the taylor series for f is \Sigma \frac{x^n}{n}


If a take a derivative it becomes x^(n-1) and if I plug anything on the interval it is less than one. I am thinking that I did this wrong because of how big that upper bound is/.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're currently using ##n## for two different purposes: the order of the derivative and the index of the sum. I strongly suggest using a different letter for one of these. For example, ##f(x) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} x^k/k##. And you want to show that ##|f^{(n+1)}(x)| \leq 2^{n+1}n!##. (I assume your exponent ##n+1## means the ##n+1##'st derivative.)

Try starting with ##n=0##. Can you show that the inequality is true in that case?
 
No one said you have to use the Taylor's series. Why don't you take 2 or 3 of derivatives directly and see if a pattern emerges. That could lead you to a proof by induction.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K