Prove that this function differentiable endles times

transgalactic
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
0
prove that this function differentiable endles times on x=0 ?? http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/6778/83126617mm0.th.gif

i was told
"once we can express the function as a power series around zero and it is differentiable at zero, we know it is infinitely differentiable"
differentiable around zero part:
<br /> f&#039;(0)=\lim_{x-&gt;0}\frac{e^\frac{-1}{x^2}-0}{x-0} \\<br /> =\lim_{x-&gt;0}\frac x{2e^{1/x^2}}<br />
i know that exponentials grow faster then polinomials but the power of the exp is 1/x^2
so the denominator goes to infinity but faster then the numenator so the expression
goes to 0.
power series around zero part:
the power series of e^x
<br /> g(x)=e^x=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^3}{6}+O(x^3)\\<br />
i put -1/x^2 instead of x
<br /> g(x)=e^x=1+\frac{-1}{x^2}+\frac{x^{4}}{2}+\frac{-x^6}{6}+O(-x^6)\\<br />

what now??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The first derivative of e^{-1/x^2}[/itex] is, of course, e^{-1/x^2}(2x^{-3}). The second derivative, using the product rule is e^{-1/x^2}(4x^{-6})+ e^{-1/x^2}(-6x^{-4}).<br /> <br /> Can you use &quot;proof by induction&quot; to show that <b>every</b> derivative is e^{-1/x^2} times terms with negative powers of x? It doesn&#039;t really matter what those powers are because, as x goes to 0, the exponential will &quot;dominate&quot; and the derivative will go to 0 as x goes to 0 so we can take every derivative to be 0 at x= 0.<br /> <br /> That means, by the way, that we could form its Taylor series at x= 0 (its MacLaurin series) as 0+ 0x+ 0x^2+ \cdot\cdot\cdot= 0. But obviously f(x) is NOT identically 0. This is an example of a function that is infinitely differentiable so has Taylor series at 0 but is NOT equal to that series except at 0.
 
my power series is fine
i took the power series for e^t and substitutes t=-1/x^2

so i got a power series and differentiation of the first around 0

is it a solution

how to do it by induction?
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top