Proving the Limit: ((e^h)-1)/h = 1 as h → 0

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yhsbboy08
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the limit of the expression \(\frac{(e^h)-1}{h}\) as \(h\) approaches 0, which is proposed to equal 1. Participants explore various methods of proof, including L'Hôpital's rule and the definition of the number \(e\), while seeking clarification on the definition and properties of \(e\).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asks for a proof of the limit \(\frac{(e^h)-1}{h}\) as \(h\) approaches 0.
  • Another suggests using L'Hôpital's rule, stating it leads to the limit being 1, but expresses fatigue regarding a formal proof.
  • A different participant argues against using L'Hôpital's rule, claiming it requires prior knowledge of the derivative of \(e^x\), which is what the limit aims to establish.
  • Some participants propose using the definition of \(e\) as a limit to derive the result, with one suggesting the series expansion for \(e^h\) as \(\sum_{j=0}^\infty\frac{h^j}{j!}\).
  • Another participant mentions that the limit can also be expressed as \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n\) and relates it to the original expression.
  • There is a request for further clarification on the definition of \(e\) and how it is typically introduced in courses or textbooks.
  • Participants discuss the implications of using different definitions of \(e\) and how they relate to the limit in question.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate methods to prove the limit, with no consensus reached on a single approach. Some favor L'Hôpital's rule while others advocate for definitions and series expansions of \(e\). The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best proof method.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependency on definitions of \(e\) and the assumptions underlying the use of L'Hôpital's rule. There are unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the limit's proof.

yhsbboy08
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
can somebody explain to me how to prove this:

the limit, as h approaches 0, of ((e^h)-1)/h equals 1.

sorry about the typing, idk how else to get it on here...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you want a real proof? Or just how you get the answer?

use L'h rule you get e^h/1 take the limit and you get 1

but as for a formal proof, I'm to tired to think lol.
 
l'hospital's rule is not a way to do this because to do that one usually has to know the derivative of e^x, but this limit is, itself, needed in order to figure out this derivative. So for a better proof try using the definition of e, this is not particularly hard if you use the definition of e as the limit (1+h)^(1/h) as h approaches zero.
 
can u explain it a lil further? what do you mean by the definition of e?
 
yhsbboy08 said:
can u explain it a lil further? what do you mean by the definition of e?

Can you explain it to me? What do you mean when you use e? It is obviously a number, but usually it is defined in some way when one is first introduced to it, in your course or textbook or whatever how is it defined?
 
I think he wants you to look at it this way: [tex]e^h=\sum_{j=0}^\infty\frac{h^j}{j!}=1+h+\frac{h^2}{2!} ++++[/tex] Now plug that into your original equation.
 
Last edited:
robert Ihnot said:
I think he wants you to look at it this way: [tex]e^h=\sum_{j=0}^\infty\frac{h^j}{j!}=1+h+\frac{h^2}{2!} ++++[/tex] Now plug that into your original equation.

Actually I was aiming for e= the limit as n approaches infinity of [1+(1/n))]^n which is equivalent to the limit as h approaches 0 of (1+h)^(1/h)
 
Well, regardless, if you can make that work out to something like: 1+1+(1-h)/2! +(1-h)(1-2h)/3!+++ all you arrive at as h goes to zero is the value for e, not the value for e^h.

Now when I took the calculus, I believe e^x was defined as [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n[/tex]
 
robert Ihnot said:
Well, regardless, if you can make that work out to something like: 1+1+(1-h)/2! +(1-h)(1-2h)/3!+++ all you arrive at as h goes to zero is the value for e, not the value for e^h.

All you need is the value of e though.
 
  • #10
You mean [tex]\frac{[(1+h)^{1/h}]^h-1}{h}[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
robert Ihnot said:
You mean [tex]\frac{[(1+h)^{1/h}]^h-1}{h}[/tex]?

Exactly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K