I know that 1^(+/- infinity) is indeterminate.Is c^(+/- infinity)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Noxide
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the indeterminate nature of expressions like 1^(±∞) and c^(±∞) for real numbers c. It is established that 1^(±∞) is indeterminate because, despite the limit of 1^n approaching 1 as n approaches ±∞, certain forms like (1 + x)^(1/x) yield different limits. For bases greater than 1, c^(∞) approaches infinity, while c^(-∞) approaches zero; the opposite is true for bases between 0 and 1. The limits do not exist for c ≤ -1, and further investigation is suggested for positive real bases. Understanding these limits is crucial for evaluating expressions involving infinity.
Noxide
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
I know that 1^(+/- infinity) is indeterminate.
Is c^(+/- infinity) indeterminate for real numbers c?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


Why do you say that 1^\infty and 1^{-\infty} are indeterminate? We have

\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} 1^n = 1

and

\lim_{n \rightarrow -\infty} 1^n = 1

If c > 1, then

\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} c^n = \infty

and

\lim_{n \rightarrow -\infty} c^n = 0

and the opposite result holds for 0 < c < 1

One of the limits doesn't exist if c < -1, and the other one doesn't exist if -1 < c < 0. Neither limit exists if c = -1. (I'll let you work out the details.)
 


Think about this in terms of limits. Do you have a feel for what the values of these limits are?
\lim_{n \to \infty} 2^n
\lim_{n \to \infty} 2^{-n} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{2^n}

To investigate this further for arbitrary bases, you probably want to limit the base to the positive reals. One case would be for a > 1. Another would be for 0 < a < 1.
 


jbunniii said:
Why do you say that 1^\infty and 1^{-\infty} are indeterminate? We have

\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} 1^n = 1
One of the indeterminate forms is [1^{\infty}]. An example of this is \lim_{x \to 0} (1 + x)^{1/x}.

Here we have the base approaching 1 and the exponent growing large without bound, yet the limit is not 1.
jbunniii said:
and

\lim_{n \rightarrow -\infty} 1^n = 1

If c &gt; 1, then

\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} c^n = \infty

and

\lim_{n \rightarrow -\infty} c^n = 0

and the opposite result holds for 0 &lt; c &lt; 1

The limits don't exist if c \leq -1, and they do exist if -1 &lt; c &lt; 0. (I'll let you work out the details.)
 


Mark44 said:
Think about this in terms of limits. Do you have a feel for what the values of these limits are?
\lim_{n \to \infty} 2^n
\lim_{n \to \infty} 2^{-n} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{2^n}

To investigate this further for arbitrary bases, you probably want to limit the base to the positive reals. One case would be for a > 1. Another would be for 0 < a < 1.

Heh. Gotcha, thanks.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top