For what p does this converge?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fk378
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the convergence of the limit expression given by (B→∞) [(lnB)^(-p+1)] / (-p+1) - [(ln1)^(-p+1)] / (-p+1). It is established that for p > 1, the limit converges, while for p ≤ 1, it diverges to infinity. The confusion arises from the interpretation of the logarithmic terms, particularly ln(1) which equals 0, and the implications of negative exponents in the context of convergence. The participants emphasize the importance of clarity in notation and the correct interpretation of limits.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with logarithmic functions and properties
  • Knowledge of convergence criteria for sequences and series
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of expressions involving exponents
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of logarithmic limits in calculus
  • Learn about convergence tests for series and sequences
  • Explore the implications of negative exponents in mathematical expressions
  • Review the definitions and applications of natural logarithms
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those focusing on calculus and analysis, as well as anyone involved in mathematical problem-solving and limit evaluation.

fk378
Messages
366
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given the limit (B-->inf) [(lnB)^(-p+1)] / (-p+1) - [(ln1)^(-p+1)] / (-p+1)

For what p does this converge?

The Attempt at a Solution



For the left side of the minus sign,
if 1-p<0 --> 0
if 1-p>0 --> inf

but for the ln(1) on the right side of the minus sign, ln(1)=0, so it would be
if 1-p<0 then you would get a zero in the denominator (since ln(1) would be raised to a negative power) and therefore ---> inf
if 1-p>0 then you would have zero as the numerator, but be left with infinity as the other value and hence ---> inf

The book says that for p>1 then it will converge. But how can that be, if you'll end up with a negative exponent for the 0??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is that really "ln(1)" in the last term? ln(1)= 0 of course. Also parentheses would help.
Finally, you should not use "B" and "b" to mean the same thing but since there is no "b" in function I am going to assume you are. I am also going to assume that is [ln(b^(-p+1))]/[-p+1] - [(ln1)^(-p+1)] / [-p+1] which, since ln(1)= 0 is the same as ln(B-p+1/(-p+1)= (-p+1)ln(B)/(-p+1)= ln(b). So you have \lim{b\rightarrow \infty} ln(b) which does not converge for any p.<br /> <br /> If you meant something else please clarify.<br /> <br /> That converges to ln(B
 
HallsofIvy said:
Is that really "ln(1)" in the last term? ln(1)= 0 of course. Also parentheses would help.
Finally, you should not use "B" and "b" to mean the same thing but since there is no "b" in function I am going to assume you are. I am also going to assume that is [ln(b^(-p+1))]/[-p+1] - [(ln1)^(-p+1)] / [-p+1] which, since ln(1)= 0 is the same as ln(B-p+1/(-p+1)= (-p+1)ln(B)/(-p+1)= ln(b). So you have \lim{b\rightarrow \infty} ln(b) which does not converge for any p.<br /> <br /> If you meant something else please clarify.<br /> <br /> That converges to ln(B
<br /> <br /> Please do not assume that when I stated (lnB)^(-p+1) I meant ln(B^-p+1) because I did not. The exponent is for the entire natural log expression. Therefore your statement regarding the answer to be just lnB is invalid. Thank you though.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K