Solving an Equation with h=0: Is 2-2x the Answer?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter B4ssHunter
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the limit of an expression involving a variable \( h \) as it approaches zero, specifically the expression \( \lim_{h \to 0} (2 - h + 2xh) \). Participants are examining whether the limit simplifies to 2 or to \( 2 - 2x \), and the implications of treating \( h \) as zero in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that treating \( h \) as zero in the limit leads to the conclusion that the expression equals 2, questioning the validity of arriving at \( 2 - 2x \).
  • Another participant inquires whether there is an \( h \) in the denominator, implying a potential connection to differentiation.
  • A different participant argues that having \( h \) in the denominator would render the expression undefined.
  • One participant reiterates their earlier claim about the limit being 2, while also expressing confusion about the correctness of the expression leading to \( 2 - 2x \).
  • A later reply acknowledges a sign mistake in the original post, indicating a potential error in the formulation of the limit but does not clarify the implications of this error.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct evaluation of the limit, with some asserting it simplifies to 2 and others suggesting it leads to \( 2 - 2x \). The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct interpretation of the limit.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing information regarding the entire problem context, which may affect the evaluation of the limit. The discussion also highlights potential confusion over the presence of \( h \) in the denominator and its implications.

B4ssHunter
Messages
178
Reaction score
4
so i was working on this equation , and in the end i came to
Lim H>0 2-h+2xh
so now i am supposed to treat H as 0
so shouldn't it be 2-(0)+2x(0) = 2 ?
i know the answer is 2-2x , as if we just removed the H , but isn't multiplying anything be zero make it a zero itself ? * 2x*0 = 0 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey B4ssHunter.

Is there meant to be a h in the denominator? Is this is some sort of differentiation problem via first principles?
 
how can there be an h in the denominator. that would make it undefined
 
B4ssHunter said:
so i was working on this equation , and in the end i came to
Lim H>0 2-h+2xh
so now i am supposed to treat H as 0
so shouldn't it be 2-(0)+2x(0) = 2 ?
i know the answer is 2-2x , as if we just removed the H , but isn't multiplying anything be zero make it a zero itself ? * 2x*0 = 0 ?
IF lim(h->0) 2- h+ 2xh is, in fact, correct, then the limit is 2, not 2- 2x.

So if you you say "I know the answer is 2- 2x", then 2- h+ 2xh must be incorrect. Please tell us what the entire problem is.
 
oh i apologize , i made a sign mistake .. i am really really sorry :S
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K