Infinitely differentiable function

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter IniquiTrance
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiable Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiability of the function defined as \( f(x) = \begin{cases} e^{-\frac{1}{x^2}} & \text{if } x\neq 0 \\ 0 & \text{if } x = 0 \end{cases} \). Participants explore whether the function is infinitely differentiable at \( x = 0 \) due to treating \( 0 \) as a constant or because of the behavior of the limit of its derivatives as \( x \) approaches \( 0 \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the infinite differentiability at \( 0 \) arises from differentiating \( 0 \) as a constant or from the limit behavior of the derivatives.
  • One participant suggests that to show differentiability at a point, one must demonstrate that the limit exists from both sides, indicating a need for a rigorous approach.
  • Another participant states that the \( n \)-th derivative can be expressed as \( e^{-1/x^2} \) over a polynomial in \( x \), and argues that the numerator approaches \( 0 \) faster than the denominator as \( x \) approaches \( 0 \).
  • There is mention of applying L'Hôpital's rule to analyze the limits involved in the derivatives.
  • One participant emphasizes the necessity of showing continuity at \( 0 \) for differentiability and notes that the function does not have a Taylor series expansion at that point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reasons for the function's infinite differentiability at \( 0 \), with no consensus reached on whether it is due to treating \( 0 \) as a constant or the limit behavior of the derivatives.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of showing continuity and the behavior of the function's derivatives, but the discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions or the implications of these points.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
This might sound like a stupid question.

[itex]f(x) = \begin{cases} &e^{-\frac{1}{x^2}} &\text{if } x\neq 0 \\ & 0 &\text{if } x = 0 \end{cases}[/itex]

Is the reason f is infinitely differentiable at 0 because we keep differentiating 0 as a constant, or because,

[itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow 0} f`(x) = \lim_{x\rightarrow 0} \frac{2}{x^3} e^{-\frac{1}{x^2}} = 0[/itex]

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
IniquiTrance said:
This might sound like a stupid question.

[itex]f(x) = \begin{cases} &e^{-\frac{1}{x^2}} &\text{if } x\neq 0 \\ & 0 &\text{if } x = 0 \end{cases}[/itex]

Is the reason f is infinitely differentiable at 0 because we keep differentiating 0 as a constant, or because,

[itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow 0} f`(x) = \lim_{x\rightarrow 0} \frac{2}{x^3} e^{-\frac{1}{x^2}} = 0[/itex]

Thanks.

Hey IniquiTrance and welcome to the forums.

If you want to show differentiability at a particular point from first principles, you need to show that the appropriate limit exists from both sides of the point (which is what you have done).

The only thing though that I would recommend is that you expand out the definition and show it step by step using the various limit theorems (since you are going to get infinities for this particular problem).
 
Thanks for the reply chiro. I was just mainly wondering whether all order derivatives were 0, because we were taking the derivative of 0 as a constant which is uniformly 0, or instead because we are using the exponential and taking a limit. I'm assuming from your response that it is because of the latter case.
 
One can show that the nth derivative is [itex]e^{-1/x^2}[/itex] over a polynomial in x. The numerator always goes to 0 faster than the denominator so the limit of the nth derivative, as x goes to 0, is 0. Much the same thing happens at x= 0. The "difference quotient, (f(h)- f(0))/h= f(h)/h, will be have [itex]e^{-1/h^2}[/itex] in the numerator and a polynomial in h in the denominator so the derivative at x= 0 is always 0 and every derivative is differentiable.
 
You can apply L Hopital's rule

setting

[itex]\epsilon[/itex]=[1][/x^2]

so then

[itex]\epsilon[/itex]*([itex]\epsilon[/itex])^0.5*e^(-1*[itex]\epsilon[/itex])

you can see this utilizing L'hopital's rule
 
IniquiTrance said:
Thanks for the reply chiro. I was just mainly wondering whether all order derivatives were 0, because we were taking the derivative of 0 as a constant which is uniformly 0, or instead because we are using the exponential and taking a limit. I'm assuming from your response that it is because of the latter case.

It's the latter. Consider the function

f(x) = 0 if x=0, x if x is not zero. Is f'(0)=0 because we're taking the derivative of the constant function 0? Clearly not, right?
 
You have to show that the function has a derivative at 0, and that it is 0.

Also you need to show that the function is continuous(as that is required for it to be differentiable).

This function is interesting because it obscures all the information about the e^(y) part of the function(and so doesn't have a taylor series expansion at 0).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K