Limit of e(-t/2)((k/2)t+c) as t Approaches Infinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter wumple
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The limit of e^(-t/2)((k/2)t+c) as t approaches infinity is definitively 0, where k and c are constants. The discussion highlights that applying L'Hôpital's rule can lead to confusion, particularly when dealing with indeterminate forms. It is established that the term e^(-t/2) approaches 0 faster than any polynomial term can approach infinity, confirming the limit's behavior. The participants emphasize the importance of recognizing the dominance of exponential decay over polynomial growth in limit evaluations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with L'Hôpital's rule
  • Knowledge of exponential functions and their properties
  • Basic polynomial behavior as t approaches infinity
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of L'Hôpital's rule in various limit problems
  • Explore the behavior of exponential functions compared to polynomial functions
  • Learn about indeterminate forms and techniques for resolving them
  • Investigate graphical methods for analyzing limits
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in calculus, mathematicians dealing with limits, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of exponential decay versus polynomial growth in mathematical analysis.

wumple
Messages
57
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the limit of e(-t/2)((k/2)t+c) as t approaches infinity where k and c are constants


Homework Equations


Not sure..?


The Attempt at a Solution


Plugging in t = infinity gives me an indeterminate form, and multiple applications of L'hopital's rule have led me no where. Any suggestions? I can see graphically that it goes to 0, but I'm not sure how to show this analytically. I can see that if I expand it, the e(-t/2)c term goes to zero, but I'm not sure about the other term.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I do not know if this is a valid form of proving limits, but e-t/2 approaches 0 faster than any polynomial can approach infinity as t→∞.
 
yeah I was hoping that L'hopital's rule would show that but it didn't work out...
 
wumple said:
yeah I was hoping that L'hopital's rule would show that but it didn't work out...

Wouldn't L'Hopital's rule as show it going to zero since d/dt{0.5kt+c} is does not contain a tern in 't'?
 
rock.freak667 said:
Wouldn't L'Hopital's rule as show it going to zero since d/dt{0.5kt+c} is does not contain a tern in 't'?

Oops! yes! Thank you, I found my mistake.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K