First principles-do both equations always work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter idlackage
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the slope of the tangent line to the function f(x) = 4 / (3-x) at the point x = 5, utilizing two different limit-based equations for slope calculation. Participants are exploring the validity and application of these equations in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply both limit definitions of the derivative but expresses uncertainty about simplifying the second equation. They question whether both equations are supposed to always work in this scenario.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively identifying and correcting mistakes in the original poster's calculations. Some guidance has been provided regarding the manipulation of limits and the treatment of terms involving h, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the simplification process and the treatment of terms when approaching the limit, as well as a broader question about the reliability of both equations in general.

idlackage
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
First principles--do both equations always work?

Homework Statement


Find the slope of the tangent line to f(x) = 4 / (3-x) at the point x = 5.

Homework Equations


m = lim(x->a) f(x) - f(a) / (x-a)
m = lim(h->0) f(a+h) - f(a) / h

The Attempt at a Solution



With the second equation:

iyk9wg.jpg


As the picture says, 1 is the correct answer for this question, but getting to it with the second equation brings me to the third last step which I'm not completely sure how to simplify. And by my guess, I'm doing it wrong. I can work it out fine with the first equation.

Semi relevant question--are both equations supposed to always work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi idlackage! :smile:

your 4 - 2 - 2h on line 5 should be 4 - 4 - 2h :redface:
 


I see a mistake between lines 5 and 6 (counting the original problem as line 1).

EDIT: Beaten to it. :redface:
 
eumyang said:
EDIT: Beaten to it. :redface:

only by h :biggrin:
 


tiny-tim said:
hi idlackage! :smile:

your 4 - 2 - 2h on line 5 should be 4 - 4 - 2h :redface:

Thank you! So now I can work it out as

2nhf90p.jpg


* If I don't multiply and just cross out the h's, the denominator's -h canceled out by the numerator's +h--I can just ignore the signs? I always thought the top's leftover -2 would become positive or something, oopes. Do I just always cross out the numerator h with the 1/h's h, or do I assess the problem before deciding which to get rid of?
 
Last edited:


"Crossing" out the h's is a very sloppy way to describe what you're doing, which is actually pulling out a factor of 1.

The underlying idea is that lim f(h)g(h) = lim f(h) * lim g(h), provided that the two separate limits both exist. In your problem you have in the penultimate step
lim (h/h)(-2/(-2 - h)) = lim (h/h)(2/(2 + h), and this can be written as the product of two limits lim (h/h) * lim 2/(2 + h). (The limits here should be understood as h --> 0.)

For any value of h other than zero, h/h = 1, so as h --> 0, h/h --> 1. The value of the other limit is also 1, so the value of the original limit expression is 1 as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K