Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Limits? changing and transformation

  1. Nov 11, 2012 #1
    okay, so I'm at the most elementary stage of learning limits and there are things which leave me baffled at times, namely two.
    1. lim (x -> a) f(x) = lim (x+k -> a+k) f(x)

    how? the physical reason behind this?

    2. the theorem to evaluate limits of the form --- 1^infinity
    if f(x)=g(x)=0 (lim: x->a)
    that is,
    lim (x -> a) [1+f(x)]^{1/g(x)} =
    e^{lim x -> a. f(x)/g(x))
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 11, 2012 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    For 1, I don't know how technically you learned the definition of the limit, but you know the idea of the limit is that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow a}f(x)=L[/itex] means that f(x) is very close to L as long as x is close enough to a. "x is close enough to a" is literally the exact same condition as "x+k is close enough to a+k".

    For 2, you know that one definition of e is
    [tex]e=\lim_{x\rightarrow 0}(1+x)^{1/x}[/tex]
    [tex](1+f(x))^{1/g(x)} = (1+f(x))^{\frac{f(x)}{f(x)g(x)}}=[(1+f(x))^{1/f(x)}]^{\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}}[/tex]
    If you call f(x) "t", you will see that as t->0, you get the limit to be e inside. You have to do a bit more proving to show that everything goes through as you would expect, but at least you see why it makes sens to expect that result.
  4. Nov 12, 2012 #3
    yes, for 1 I get that x is close to a, so x+k is close to a+k, but the doubt I have is how the result Is same?
  5. Nov 12, 2012 #4


    User Avatar
    Education Advisor

    One way to see the first property is let y = x + k, and thus f(x) = f(y-k). From there it is pretty straight forward. I'm a bit to lazy to find a formal proof, but I imagine the argument would follow that line. To be honest, I never came across that property, so I'm not entirely sure if it's always true, but it seems right.
  6. Nov 12, 2012 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    [itex]\lim_{x\to a}f(x)= L[/itex] means that "'Given any [itex]\epsilon> 0[/itex], there exist [itex]\delta> 0[/itex] such that if [itex]|x- a|< \delta[/itex], then [itex]|f(x)- L|< \epsilon[/itex]".

    And it should be easy to see that we can replace x by x+ k and a by a+ k to get exactly the same result: |(x+k)- (a+ k)|= |x- a|.

    Be careful, this does NOT say that the limit "at x= a+ k" is the same as the limit "at x= a". We are still dealing with |f(x)- L|, NOT with |f(x+k)- L|.
  7. Nov 13, 2012 #6
    thank you! now it's clear. we just express a expression in some other way by changing the limit but the meaning and result remains the same
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook