Prove the following limits when c ∈ N (analysis help):

  • Thread starter cooljosh2k2
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Limits
In summary, the conversation discusses proving the limits of two equations involving radicals, with one involving a root of a number and the other involving a root of a fraction. The person attempting the solution multiplies the numerator and denominator to eliminate the radical, but realizes this approach only works for square roots and gets stuck. It is suggested to use a pattern to eliminate the radical, but it is also pointed out that the person needs to prove the limits, not just evaluate them. It is recommended to consult with the professor for clarification on what method to use for the proof.
  • #1
cooljosh2k2
69
0

Homework Statement


Prove that when c ∈ N:

a)
lim [[tex]\sqrt[c]{1+x}[/tex] - 1]/x = 1/c
x->0

b)
lim [(1+x)^r - 1]/x = r
x->0

,where r = c/n


The Attempt at a Solution



My approach for a and b are pretty similar, i get stuck at the same point.

For a, i multiplied the numerator and the denominator by [(1+x)^(1/c) + 1] to get rid of the radical on top. This left me with:

Lim 1/[(1+x)^(1/c)+1]
x->0

This is where I am stuck, if i find the limit of the numerator and divide it by the limit of the denominator, i don't get 1/c. So I am clearly doing something wrong.

As for part c, i pretty much use the same approach and get:

Lim 1/[(1+x)^(r)+1]
x->0

which also doesn't lead to the answer.

Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
cooljosh2k2 said:

Homework Statement


Prove that when c ∈ N:

a)
lim [[tex]\sqrt[c]{1+x}[/tex] - 1]/x = 1/c
x->0

b)
lim [(1+x)^r - 1]/x = r
x->0

,where r = c/n


The Attempt at a Solution



My approach for a and b are pretty similar, i get stuck at the same point.

For a, i multiplied the numerator and the denominator by [(1+x)^(1/c) + 1] to get rid of the radical on top.
This works for square roots, but not for cube roots, fourth roots, etc.

(a - b)(a + b) = a2 - b2
If a is the square root of something, a2 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a2 + ab + b2 = a3 - b3
This time, if a is the cube root of something, a3 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a3 +a2b + ab2 + b3) = a4 - b4
In this example, if a is the fourth root of something, a4 will have the radical eliminated.

Notice that there is a pattern here.
cooljosh2k2 said:
This left me with:

Lim 1/[(1+x)^(1/c)+1]
x->0

This is where I am stuck, if i find the limit of the numerator and divide it by the limit of the denominator, i don't get 1/c. So I am clearly doing something wrong.

As for part c, i pretty much use the same approach and get:

Lim 1/[(1+x)^(r)+1]
x->0

which also doesn't lead to the answer.

Please help.
 
  • #3
Mark44 said:
This works for square roots, but not for cube roots, fourth roots, etc.

(a - b)(a + b) = a2 - b2
If a is the square root of something, a2 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a2 + ab + b2 = a3 - b3
This time, if a is the cube root of something, a3 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a3 +a2b + ab2 + b3) = a4 - b4
In this example, if a is the fourth root of something, a4 will have the radical eliminated.

Notice that there is a pattern here.

Im confused, isn't that what i did? I removed the radical in the numerator by multiplying it by the the square root + 1, but it then leaves me with a radical in the denominator. I still don't understand how it would give me for a) a limit of 1/c.
 
  • #4
Are you trying to prove or "evaluate" these limits because I don't see any epsilons and deltas.
 
  • #5
╔(σ_σ)╝ said:
Are you trying to prove or "evaluate" these limits because I don't see any epsilons and deltas.

The question says "prove that...", but doesn't specify if i have to use epsilons and deltas or can use another theorem such as squeeze theorem, ratio theorem, etc to prove the limit.
 
  • #6
Maybe you should ask your professor because what you are doing now is verifying not proving since you are already given the limits.
 
  • #7
Mark44 said:
This works for square roots, but not for cube roots, fourth roots, etc.

(a - b)(a + b) = a2 - b2
If a is the square root of something, a2 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a2 + ab + b2 = a3 - b3
This time, if a is the cube root of something, a3 will have the radical eliminated.

(a - b)(a3 +a2b + ab2 + b3) = a4 - b4
In this example, if a is the fourth root of something, a4 will have the radical eliminated.

Notice that there is a pattern here.

cooljosh2k2 said:
Im confused, isn't that what i did? I removed the radical in the numerator by multiplying it by the the square root + 1, but it then leaves me with a radical in the denominator. I still don't understand how it would give me for a) a limit of 1/c.

You CANNOT remove the radical in the numerator if you multiply the "c"th root of 1 + x by the square root of 1 + x. Also, as ╔(σ_σ)╝ points out, you need to prove that the limits are as given, not just evaluate them. That will entail using an epsilon-delta proof.
 

What is a limit?

A limit is a mathematical concept that refers to the value that a function approaches as its input approaches a certain point or value. It is denoted by the symbol "lim" and is used to describe the behavior of a function near a specific point.

What does it mean to prove a limit?

To prove a limit means to show that the value of a function at a certain point or value approaches a specific value as the input approaches that point or value. This is typically done by using mathematical techniques, such as the epsilon-delta definition, to show that the function gets arbitrarily close to the limit value as the input gets closer to the specified point or value.

What is the epsilon-delta definition of a limit?

The epsilon-delta definition of a limit is a mathematical statement that describes the behavior of a function near a specific point or value. It states that for any small distance (epsilon) around the limit value, there exists a corresponding small interval (delta) around the specified point or value such that the function values within that interval are within the epsilon distance of the limit value.

What is the significance of proving limits when c ∈ N?

Proving limits when c ∈ N (the set of natural numbers) is significant because it helps us understand the behavior of a function near integer values. This is especially useful in real-world applications where functions are often defined on discrete values, such as time or distance. It also allows us to make accurate predictions about the behavior of a function at these specific points.

What are some common techniques used to prove limits when c ∈ N?

Some common techniques used to prove limits when c ∈ N include the epsilon-delta definition, the squeeze theorem, and the use of basic limit rules such as the limit of a sum, product, or quotient. Proofs may also involve using algebraic manipulation, trigonometric identities, or properties of limits such as the limit of a composition of functions.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
709
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
253
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
516
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
303
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
660
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
871
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
458
Back
Top