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
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top