L ' Hopital's Rule for x -> infinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter unscientific
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of L'Hôpital's Rule as x approaches infinity, comparing it to its application as x approaches zero. Participants are examining the conditions under which the rule applies and the implications of using Taylor expansions in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the validity of applying L'Hôpital's Rule for limits approaching infinity, questioning the assumptions made in the original post. There is a focus on the derivatives of functions and the implications of using Taylor expansions when both functions approach infinity.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and questioning each other's reasoning. Some have suggested alternative approaches to the problem, while others are clarifying the conditions necessary for applying L'Hôpital's Rule correctly.

Contextual Notes

There is confusion regarding the application of Taylor expansions for functions that are undefined at certain points, as well as the need for careful consideration of limits when both functions approach infinity.

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


Hopital's Rule for x -> ∞ applies the same way as x -> 0.


Homework Equations



As shown in attached pic.

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to prove that x->∞ works the same way as x -> 0, only to get its reciprocal.. Not sure what is wrong with my working..
 

Attachments

  • hopital2.jpg
    hopital2.jpg
    9.4 KB · Views: 448
  • Hopital.jpg
    Hopital.jpg
    13.9 KB · Views: 480
Physics news on Phys.org
unscientific said:

Homework Statement


Hopital's Rule for x -> ∞ applies the same way as x -> 0.

Homework Equations



As shown in attached pic.

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to prove that x->∞ works the same way as x -> 0, only to get its reciprocal.. Not sure what is wrong with my working..

Why should h or k have a derivative at a? You'll have to come up with different reasoning.
 
You ask about L'Hopital's rule applying "as x-> infinity" but your attachment has x->a while it is f(x) and g(x) that go to infinity. Which are you trying to prove?
 
HallsofIvy said:
You ask about L'Hopital's rule applying "as x-> infinity" but your attachment has x->a while it is f(x) and g(x) that go to infinity. Which are you trying to prove?

No only that, you applied Taylor expansions of f(x) and g(x) at x = a, where both functions are infinite! You can't do that.

RGV
 
HallsofIvy said:
You ask about L'Hopital's rule applying "as x-> infinity" but your attachment has x->a while it is f(x) and g(x) that go to infinity. Which are you trying to prove?

Sorry for the confusion! I mean f(a) = g(a) = ∞

I earlier showed that l'Hopital's Rule works when its 0/0 but I am now trying to show it works for ∞/∞.

So i took (1/g)/(1/f) to make it 0/0..

But when i use taylor's expansion something's wrong..
 
unscientific said:
Sorry for the confusion! I mean f(a) = g(a) = ∞

I earlier showed that l'Hopital's Rule works when its 0/0 but I am now trying to show it works for ∞/∞.

So i took (1/g)/(1/f) to make it 0/0..

But when i use taylor's expansion something's wrong..


What is Taylor's expansion for 1/(f(x)) , expanded about x = a ?
This poses a problem since 1/f(a) is undefined.​

Construct two functions, F(x) & G(x) such that F(a) = 0 = G(a), otherwise F(x) = 1/f(x) and G(x) = 1/g(x) .
 
SammyS said:
What is Taylor's expansion for 1/(f(x)) , expanded about x = a ?
This poses a problem since 1/f(a) is undefined.​

Construct two functions, F(x) & G(x) such that F(a) = 0 = G(a), otherwise F(x) = 1/f(x) and G(x) = 1/g(x) .

Yes i did that, i let 1/g = h, 1/f = k.

then it reduces to [ h'(x)/k'(x) ] which translates to [g'(x)/f'(x)], which is the reciprocal instead..
 
unscientific said:
Yes i did that, i let 1/g = h, 1/f = k.

then it reduces to [ h'(x)/k'(x) ] which translates to [g'(x)/f'(x)], which is the reciprocal instead..

Check that again.

So, [itex]\displaystyle h(x)=\frac{1}{g(x)}\quad\to\quad h'(x)=-\frac{g'(x)}{(g(x))^2}\ .[/itex]

A similar result holds for k'(x) .

[itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\lim_{x\to a}\frac{h(x)}{k(x)}[/itex]
[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{h'(x)}{k'(x)}[/itex]

[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{g'(x)}{(g(x))^2}\frac{(f(x))^2}{f'(x)}[/itex]

[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{g'(x)}{f'(x)}\ \lim_{x\to a}\frac{(f(x))^2}{(g(x))^2}[/itex]​

Can you take it from there?
 
SammyS said:
Check that again.

So, [itex]\displaystyle h(x)=\frac{1}{g(x)}\quad\to\quad h'(x)=-\frac{g'(x)}{(g(x))^2}\ .[/itex]

A similar result holds for k'(x) .

[itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\lim_{x\to a}\frac{h(x)}{k(x)}[/itex]
[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{h'(x)}{k'(x)}[/itex]

[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{g'(x)}{(g(x))^2}\frac{(f(x))^2}{f'(x)}[/itex]

[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{g'(x)}{f'(x)}\ \lim_{x\to a}\frac{(f(x))^2}{(g(x))^2}[/itex]​

Can you take it from there?

Yes I ended up with that step. So f(a) = g(a), f/g = 1.

Then we have g'(x)/f'(x), which is the reciprocal, where I am stuck at...
 
  • #10
unscientific said:
Yes I ended up with that step. So f(a) = g(a), f/g = 1.

Then we have g'(x)/f'(x), which is the reciprocal, where I am stuck at...
What is that reciprocal equal to ?
 
  • #11
SammyS said:
What is that reciprocal equal to ?

By right I should get f'(x)/g'(x) as when approximating x→0.

But I'm getting g'(x)/f'(x) instead..
 
  • #12
SammyS said:
[itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\dots[/itex]
[itex]\displaystyle =\lim_{x\to a}\frac{g'(x)}{f'(x)}\ \lim_{x\to a}\frac{(f(x))^2}{(g(x))^2}[/itex]​

unscientific said:
By right I should get f'(x)/g'(x) as when approximating x→0.

But I'm getting g'(x)/f'(x) instead..
Suppose both limits [itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}f'(x) \,,\ \lim_{x\to a}g'(x)[/itex] exist & that [itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}f'(x)\ne0\ .[/itex]

Then the following should give the desired result.
[itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=<br /> \frac{\lim_{x\to a}g'(x)}{\lim_{x\to a}f'(x)}\cdot \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}\cdot \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}[/itex]​
 
  • #13
SammyS said:
Suppose both limits [itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}f'(x) \,,\ \lim_{x\to a}g'(x)[/itex] exist & that [itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}f'(x)\ne0\ .[/itex]

Then the following should give the desired result.
[itex]\displaystyle \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=<br /> \frac{\lim_{x\to a}g'(x)}{\lim_{x\to a}f'(x)}\cdot \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}\cdot \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}[/itex]​

I see! then the f(x)/g(x) cancels on both sides leaving only one f(x)/g(x) on the right, then you bring over the g'(x)/f'(x) to the left to give f'(x)/g'(x) as desired!
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K