Simple Substitution Taylor Polynomials

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Taylor polynomials and Maclaurin series, particularly focusing on the substitution of functions within these series. Participants explore the validity of using simple substitution for functions like arctan(x) when substituting more complex expressions such as arctan(x^2 + 1). The conversation touches on theoretical aspects, calculations, and the implications of using substitution in Taylor series expansions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the Maclaurin series for a function can be derived by substituting a more complex expression into the series of the original function.
  • Others argue that this substitution may not hold true for all functions, particularly when derivatives involve repeated application of the chain rule.
  • A participant expresses confusion over the constant term comparison between the Taylor polynomial obtained through expansion and that obtained through substitution.
  • One participant suggests that the substitution method does not yield a term-by-term equivalence, indicating that the overall summation is what should be equal rather than individual terms.
  • Another participant mentions that for finite polynomial functions, the derivatives vanish after a certain power, but questions remain about the behavior of infinite polynomials.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the substitution method for all functions. There are competing views on whether the approach works universally, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the general case of function substitution in Taylor series.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential dependency on the nature of the function being substituted and the unresolved mathematical steps in deriving the Taylor series for more complex functions. The discussion highlights the need for careful evaluation of derivatives and the conditions under which substitution may or may not be valid.

friendbobbiny
Messages
49
Reaction score
2
I've been taught that with the basic form of a function's maclaurin series, complex forms of the same series can be found. For example, the first three terms for arctan(x) are x-x^3/3 + x^5/5, meaning the first three terms for arctan(x^2+1) at a=0 should be (x^2+1) - ((x^2+1)^3)/3 + ((x^2+1)^5/5). If this is the case, why is it?

I can understand why the taylor series for e^2x and other, repetitive functions follow this simple substitution.

But for those functions whose derivatives require repeated application of the chain rule, why does " simple substitution" work.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF;
friendbobbiny said:
I've been taught that with the basic form of a function's maclaurin series, complex forms of the same series can be found.

For example, the first three terms for arctan(x) are x-x^3/3 + x^5/5, meaning the first three terms for arctan(x^2+1) at a=0 should be (x^2+1) - ((x^2+1)^3)/3 + ((x^2+1)^5/5).
Just making sure I understand you:

By "complex" you mean "more complicated"?
(the word "complex" has a special meaning in maths.)

In particular, you mean that the Maclaurin series expansion of f(g(x)) can be just the expansion for f(x) with g(x) substituted for every x?

If this is the case, why is it?
... for the specific example where f(x)=arctan(x), you sound like you don't know that this is actually the case - have you tried calculating it from scratch?

I can understand why the taylor series for e^2x and other, repetitive functions follow this simple substitution.

But for those functions whose derivatives require repeated application of the chain rule, why does " simple substitution" work.
... it sounds like you have yet to show that it does work.
Start there - have a go working out the general case of f(g(x)) and see where you get to.

Notice:
http://www.sosmath.com/calculus/tayser/tayser02/tayser02.html
... the substitution approach is pretty general, but does it work for all substitutions?
i.e. if you want the series for f(x)=1/(1+x^2) can you just use the series for f(q)=1/q?

Working these out should help you understand what is going on.
 
Hi,
Thanks for the help. Pardon the formatting below. I tried the following:

To see whether substitution of u=g(x) for the taylor polynomial f(g(x) worked, I compared the constant term of the taylor polynomial by expansion with the constat term of the taylor polynomial by substitution. I could not see how else to compare the two polynomials, given what I know.

the constant term by expansion is +/- (pi/4). arctan(1+(0)^2) = ...

Is this equal to the constat term for ∑((1+x^2)^(2n+1)*(-1)^(n+1))/(2n+1)! from n=0 to infiniti ?

the constant term for the above polynomial is given by:

∑ (-1)^(n+1)/(n+2) from n=1 to infiniti. This is because expansion of the above polynomial gives (for constant terms): 1-1/3+1/5...

But this sum is not equal to pi/4. So I'm not sure what I did wrong here.

how should I set up the general case?

many thanks
 
friendbobbiny said:
I've been taught that with the basic form of a function's maclaurin series, complex forms of the same series can be found. For example, the first three terms for arctan(x) are x-x^3/3 + x^5/5, meaning the first three terms for arctan(x^2+1) at a=0 should be (x^2+1) - ((x^2+1)^3)/3 + ((x^2+1)^5/5). If this is the case, why is it?

That's not correct; the presence of the +1 means this method doesn't work.
[tex] \arctan(x) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{n} x^{2n+1}}{(2n + 1)!}[/tex]
so
[tex] \arctan(x^2 + 1) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{n} (x^2 + 1)^{2n+1}}{(2n + 1)!}<br /> = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{n}}{(2n + 1)!} <br /> \sum_{k=0}^{2n+1} \frac{(2n+1)!}{(2n + 1 - k)!k!}x^{2k} \\<br /> = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \sum_{k=0}^{2n+1} \frac{(-1)^n}{(2n + 1 - k)!k!}x^{2k}[/tex]
so that the first three terms in the series for [itex]\arctan(1 + x^2)[/itex] are
[tex] \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^n}{(2n + 1)!} <br /> + x^2 \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^n}{(2n)!}<br /> + x^4 \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^n}{(2n - 1)!2!}.[/tex]

Working out the Taylor series for [itex]f(x) = \arctan(1 + x) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n[/itex] and then calculating [itex]f(x^2) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^{2n}[/itex] is the better method here.
 
What pasmith has done is part of what I was suggesting you do ...

Your "1st 3 terms" expansion:
(x^2+1) - ((x^2+1)^3)/3 + ((x^2+1)^5/5)

going off the actual calculation (post #4):
n=0 gives 1+x^2 ... same as your zero term
n=1 gives -1/6 - (1/2)x^2 - (1/2)x^4 ... which is way off yours, but have you calculated all the coefficients of x^2 and x^4 yet?

n=3 requires more terms in both expansions, so we cannot compare them.

What this shows you though is that the substitution approach is not a term-by-term equivalence
... the first three "terms" in the substitution method are not equal to the first three Taylor series terms.

... it is the overall summation that is supposed to be equal - so to do the term-by-term comparison I was suggesting needs more substitution terms to be calculated - so they can be compared with the taylor series terms.

You asked about the general case:

In general: f(g(x)) expanded about x=0:$$f\circ g = \sum_{n=0} \frac{x^n}{n!}\frac{d^n}{dx^n}[f\circ g](x=0)$$
So you need to be able to evaluate the nth derivative:
$$(f\circ g)'=g'[f'\circ g]\\ (f\circ g)'' = g'' [f'\circ g]+(g')^2[f''\circ g]\\ \cdots$$... etc. Look for a pattern.

Then try it for $$f(g)=\sum_{n=0} \frac{g^n}{n!}\frac{d^n}{dg^n}f(g=0)$$... and compare.

Note: your examples have g(x) as a polynomial ... are the above expansions special if g is a polynomial? What about other functions?

(Aside: you can always make a polynomial expansion of any arbitrary g...)

All this is a lot of work to get through - but it is labor intensive rather than difficult.
Just take it slowly and take care, you may find some sort of restrictions for how the substituton approach works.
 
For finite polynomial g it is not much work since the n-th derivatives of g all vanish after some power n.
Not quite sure what the general pattern is for infinite polynomials though.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K