Limits? changing and transformation

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter harjyot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits Transformation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of limits in calculus, specifically addressing two main questions: the equivalence of limits when shifting the variable by a constant and the evaluation of limits of the form \(1^\infty\). Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings and implications of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the limit property \(\lim (x \to a) f(x) = \lim (x+k \to a+k) f(x)\) holds true and seeks a physical explanation.
  • Another participant explains that the idea of limits implies that \(f(x)\) approaches \(L\) as \(x\) approaches \(a\), which is equivalent to \(x+k\) approaching \(a+k\).
  • A different participant expresses confusion about the equivalence of the limits and seeks further clarification.
  • One response suggests letting \(y = x + k\) to demonstrate the property, although the participant admits uncertainty about the universality of this property.
  • Another participant provides a formal definition of limits and shows how the substitution of variables maintains the limit's structure, emphasizing that this does not imply the limits at different points are the same.
  • A later reply indicates that the initial confusion has been resolved, acknowledging that the expression can be reformulated without changing its meaning or result.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the validity of the limit property discussed, although some express uncertainty about its universality. The discussion remains open regarding the deeper implications and proofs of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the need for formal proofs to fully establish the properties discussed, indicating that the conversation is exploratory and not yet settled in terms of rigorous mathematical validation.

harjyot
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
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))
 
Physics news on Phys.org
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]
Well,
[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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
[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|.
 
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
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K