Solving Basic Log Question: x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bazman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Log
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the behavior of the expression x^y * |ln(1/x)|^m under two conditions: as x approaches infinity with y<1 and as x approaches zero with y>0. For the first case, as x approaches infinity, the expression simplifies to x^y * (log x)^m, leading to an indeterminate form that requires L'Hôpital's rule for resolution. In the second case, as x approaches zero, the expression also results in an indeterminate form. The key takeaway is that both scenarios necessitate the application of L'Hôpital's rule to properly evaluate the limits. Understanding these behaviors is essential for resolving the mathematical queries posed.
Bazman
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I come from an engineering background and so have not studied analysis (sadly). I need to figure out the following.

How does:

1.) x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m behave for any m given y<0 as x-> infinity

2.) x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m behave for any m given y>0 as x-> 0

The way I see it in the first example as x-> infinity the |ln(1/x)|-> infinity
so effectively you have infinity^y*infinity^m and y is less than 1. So this should explode right?

However the answer is apparently that the expression->x?

In the second |ln(1/x)|-> infinity as x tends to 0. So effectivey you have
infinity^m*0=0.
However the answer is apparently that the expression ->1?

Can someone please explain where I am going wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You can simplify this using |\log(1/x)| = |-\log x| = \log x.
Thus, x^y|\log(1/x)^m| = x^y(\log x)^m.

The following only works if m is positive. In both problems, x^y\to 0 and (\log x)^m\to\infty as x\to\infty (1) or x\to 0 (2). The product is indeterminate. Solving it calls for L'Hopital's rule.
 
Bazman said:
Hi,

I come from an engineering background and so have not studied analysis (sadly). I need to figure out the following.

How does:

1.) x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m behave for any m given y<0 as x-> infinity

2.) x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m behave for any m given y>0 as x-> 0

The way I see it in the first example as x-> infinity the |ln(1/x)|-> infinity
so effectively you have infinity^y*infinity^m and y is less than 1. So this should explode right?

However the answer is apparently that the expression->x?

In the second |ln(1/x)|-> infinity as x tends to 0. So effectivey you have
infinity^m*0=0.
However the answer is apparently that the expression ->1?

Can someone please explain where I am going wrong?



D H said:
You can simplify this using |\log(1/x)| = |-\log x| = \log x.
Thus, x^y|\log(1/x)^m| = x^y(\log x)^m.

The following only works if m is positive. In both problems, x^y\to 0 and (\log x)^m\to\infty as x\to\infty (1) or x\to 0 (2). The product is indeterminate. Solving it calls for L'Hopital's rule.

Sorry problem 1 above should read

1.) x^y*|ln(1/x)|^m behave for any m given y<1 as x-> infinity

but I don;t think that changes the nature of your argument.

In any case thanks will look into L'hopital's rule
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top