Limit of k^k/(k+1)^k: How to Solve for the Asymptote?

  • Thread starter mpm166
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Limit
In summary, the conversation discussed finding the limit for the expression lim(k->infinity) k^k/(k+1)^k and how to prove it using the definition of a limit. Various methods were suggested, including using the squeeze theorem and the series definition of e. Ultimately, the limit was determined to be 1/e using the binomial theorem.
  • #1
mpm166
14
0
Hi,

I am at an intermedate step of a larger problem and I need to find the following limit:

lim(k->infinity) k^k/(k+1)^k

I see what this equals (by using computational software) but I am not sure how to show this.

Any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
mpm166 said:
Hi,

I am at an intermedate step of a larger problem and I need to find the following limit:

lim(k->infinity) k^k/(k+1)^k

I see what this equals (by using computational software) but I am not sure how to show this.

Any help?

Through the epsilon-delta definition of a limit?

Is the limit 0 or 1? I'm just taking a guess here without computing anything. Looks like 0 or 1 to me.

For advice, try writing it like this...

k^k/(k+1)^k = [k/(k+1)]^k

Look at the k and k+1.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
It's actually 1/e :smile:
 
  • #4
Actually it's not 0 or 1, now that I looked at it for a minute.
 
  • #5
mpm166 said:
It's actually 1/e :smile:

Yeah, I soon as I realized that it wasn't 0 or 1 it came to me that I saw it before.

Just didn't know where.
 
  • #6
mpm166 said:
Hi,

I am at an intermedate step of a larger problem and I need to find the following limit:

lim(k->infinity) k^k/(k+1)^k

I see what this equals (by using computational software) but I am not sure how to show this.

Any help?


Can be written as [itex] ({k \over k +1 })^k [/itex] which is [itex] ({ 1 + 1/k })^{-k} [/itex] and this is a well know form...As k goes to infinity it goes to [itex] e^{-1} [/itex]

(it is well known in the form [itex] lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} (1 + {1 \over n})^n = e [/itex])

Patrick
 
  • #7
thanks for the help
 
  • #8
nrqed said:
Can be written as [itex] ({k \over k +1 })^k [/itex] which is [itex] ({ 1 + 1/k })^{-k} [/itex] and this is a well know form...As k goes to infinity it goes to [itex] e^{-1} [/itex]

(it is well known in the form [itex] lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} (1 + {1 \over n})^n = e [/itex])

Patrick

How do you prove it though using the definition of a limit?

I'll give it a shot myself, but it doesn't seem like something that is pleasant to work with.
 
  • #9
JasonRox said:
How do you prove it though using the definition of a limit?

I'll give it a shot myself, but it doesn't seem like something that is pleasant to work with.

It`s probably not rigorous but one way is to consider instead the natural log of this expression. Setting x=1/n, one has to consider the limit as x goes to zero of ln(1+x)/x, an indeterminate form. Using L`Hospital rule, this gives 1. So the initial limit is e^1.

Patrick
 
  • #10
nrqed said:
It`s probably not rigorous but one way is to consider instead the natural log of this expression. Setting x=1/n, one has to consider the limit as x goes to zero of ln(1+x)/x, an indeterminate form. Using L`Hospital rule, this gives 1. So the initial limit is e^1.

Patrick

Yeah, I see what you mean.

It's not rigorous in the sense that taking the log doesn't always work.

It would still be nice to see a proof though.
 
  • #11
quick question, to solve this problem isn't this how you set it up?

[tex]1+e<k^2/(k^2+k)[/tex]
isn't the the right equation?
 
  • #12
konartist said:
quick question, to solve this problem isn't this how you set it up?

[tex]1+e<k^2/(k^2+k)[/tex]
isn't the the right equation?

That's false though. Try k=1.

I think using the Squeeze Theorem might provide an answer though.
 
  • #13
It would still be nice to see a proof though.
We can start from the series defintion of e

[tex]e = \sum \frac{1}{n!}[/tex]

Let [itex]S_n = 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!} + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}[/tex] and [itex]T_n = (1 + \frac{1}{n})^n[/itex]. I'm going to assume that T = lim T_n exists, although it can be proved by messing around with inequalities and the binomial theorem (if I recall correctly). Let's actually use the binomial theorem:

[tex]
\begin{align*}
T_n &= 1 + n\frac{1}{n} + \frac{n(n-1)}{2!}\frac{1}{n^2} + \cdots + \frac{n(n-1)(n-2)\cdots 1}{n!}\frac{1}{n^n} \\
&= 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!}(1 - \frac{1}{n}) + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}(1 - \frac{1}{n})(1 - \frac{2}{n}) \cdots (1 - \frac{n-1}{n})
\end{align*}
[/tex]

Now notice that if N>n, then:

[tex]
T_N > 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!} (1 - \frac{1}{N}) + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}(1 - \frac{1}{N}) \cdots (1 - \frac{n-1}{N})
[/tex]

Hence if we let N tend to infinity, the left side tends to T while the right side tends to S_n. Therefore we have S_n <= T. However we can also see that S_n >= T_n for all n. So we actually have T_n <= S_n <= T. And thus T = lim S_n = e.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
devious_ said:
We can start from the series defintion of e

[tex]e = \sum \frac{1}{n!}[/tex]

Let [itex]S_n = 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!} + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}[/tex] and [itex]T_n = (1 + \frac{1}{n})^n[/itex]. I'm going to assume that T = lim T_n exists, although it can be proved by messing around with inequalities and the binomial theorem (if I recall correctly). Let's actually use the binomial theorem:

[tex]
\begin{align*}
T_n &= 1 + n\frac{1}{n} + \frac{n(n-1)}{2!}\frac{1}{n^2} + \cdots + \frac{n(n-1)(n-2)\cdots 1}{n!}\frac{1}{n^n} \\
&= 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!}(1 - \frac{1}{n}) + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}(1 - \frac{1}{n})(1 - \frac{2}{n}) \cdots (1 - \frac{n-1}{n})
\end{align*}
[/tex]

Now notice that if N>n, then:

[tex]
T_N > 1 + 1 + \frac{1}{2!} (1 - \frac{1}{N}) + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}(1 - \frac{1}{N}) \cdots (1 - \frac{n-1}{N})
[/tex]

Hence if we let N tend to infinity, the left side tends to T while the right side tends to S_n. Therefore we have S_n <= T. However we can also see that S_n >= T_n for all n. So we actually have T_n <= S_n <= T. And thus T = lim S_n = e.

When you're taking N approaches infinity, are you assuming n is tagging along just behind it? Or is n fixed?
 
  • #15
JasonRox said:
When you're taking N approaches infinity, are you assuming n is tagging along just behind it? Or is n fixed?
It's fixed of course. Maybe I should have stated that. :smile:
 
  • #16
Ok, if N>n, then 1/N! < 1/n!. You can do this easily by induction.

But, you got 1/n! in your right hand side of that inequality. You replaced 1/N! with a bigger number 1/n!. Also, you replaced N with n for the numerators too, so that makes it smaller. Also, T_N has more terms than the right hand side.

After replacing certain N's with n and subtracting a few terms, how can you justify this inequality holds?

I'm not positive if I did this right, but T_2 = 2.25 so that's T_N. Now, N=2, so n=1 (only option), but on the right side of the inequality I'm getting 2.25.

Maybe it's not strictly larger? Or maybe you don't know the Latex code for it because you say "<=" later. :tongue2:

I'm going to have to write his out and see if I can satisfy myself. Looks right, but I'll just work out the details for myself.

The idea of the Squeeze Theorem is what I thought it would be.
 
  • #17
No, I meant strictly larger.
 

What is the purpose of finding the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k?

The limit of k^k/(k+1)^k is important in calculus and other areas of mathematics because it helps to determine the behavior of a function as the input approaches a certain value. It can also help to solve problems related to optimization, growth, and decay.

How do you find the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k?

To find the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k, you can use techniques such as L'Hôpital's rule, the squeeze theorem, or algebraic manipulation. Depending on the function, you may also need to use properties of limits such as the limit laws.

What is the significance of the exponent k in the function k^k?

The exponent k represents a variable, which means that the function k^k is a variable raised to itself. This type of function is known as an exponential function and is commonly used to model growth and decay in various fields of science and mathematics.

How does the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k relate to other types of limits?

The limit of k^k/(k+1)^k is similar to other types of limits, such as the limit of k^p/(k+1)^q, where p and q are constants. However, the presence of the variable k adds an extra layer of complexity and may require different techniques to find the limit.

Are there any real-world applications of finding the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k?

Yes, there are many real-world applications of finding the limit of k^k/(k+1)^k. For example, it can be used to determine the maximum and minimum values of a function, to model population growth, or to analyze the behavior of financial investments over time.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
421
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
435
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
465
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
983
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
534
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
748
Back
Top