The Conjugate Method for Limits

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the use of the conjugate method for evaluating limits, particularly when faced with expressions that yield a zero in the denominator. It highlights that while the conjugate method can simplify certain limits, it may not always resolve the issue of a zero denominator, especially when the numerator contains a function like f(x). The examples provided illustrate that both the conjugate method and factoring can lead to similar results, raising questions about their distinctiveness and applicability. The conversation emphasizes that multiplying by the conjugate is meant to create common factors for cancellation, but this approach may not be effective if the numerator is not conducive to simplification. Ultimately, the discussion seeks clarity on whether there are specific scenarios where one method is preferable over the other.
charley076
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm reviewing limits to tutor a student in precalc and came across a problem.

The conjugate method multiplies the numerator and denominator by the conjugate of the numerator or denominator to simplify the equation. However, after a quick example I wrote for myself, I found that:

lim x-> 3
f(x) / (x-3)
Conjugate Method on the Denominator
lim x-> 3
f(x)*(x+3) / (x^2-9)
The limit still has a 0 in the denominator

lim x-> -3
f(x) / (x+3)
Conjugate Method on the Denominator
lim x-> -3
f(x)*(x-3) / (x^2-9)
The limit still has a 0 in the denominator

The examples of "The Conjugate Method" that I've found online have all multiplied by the conjugate to create a common factor to eliminate the 0 in the denominator.

Ex.
lim x-> 4
(sqrt(x)-2) / x-4
Conjugate of Numerator
lim x-> 4
x-4 / ((x-4)(sqrt(x)+2)
Cancel common factor
lim x-> 4
1 / (sqrt(x)+2)
=1/4

My issue is that the conjugate method is the same as the factoring method as far as I understand it. Is there a difference or is the conjugate method simply easier to use when the factors aren't as easily identifiable.

My point using the example above is:
lim x-> 4
(sqrt(x)-2) / x-4
Factor the denominator into (sqrt(x)-2) & (sqrt(x)+2)
lim x-> 4
(sqrt(x)-2) / ((sqrt(x)-2)(sqrt(x)+2))
Cancel (sqrt(x)-2)
lim x-> 4
1 / (sqrt(x)+2)
= 1/4

Is there a difference between these methods?
Is there a time when only one or the other can be used?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In your first two examples, you have f(x) in the numerator, so multiplying the expression by 1 in the form of the conjugate over itself isn't going to get you anywhere.

The purpose of multiplying by the conjugate over itself is to be able to get common factors in the numerator and denominator that you can eliminate in the hope of being able to evaluate the rest of the limit expression.
 
Sorry for the confusion, the reason I put f(x) as the numerator was b/c i didn't know what to put there that wouldn't cause the limit to evaluate to infinity. I just meant f(x) to be filler, i.e. regardless of what the numerator is, multiplying top and bottom by the conjugate of the denominator doesn't resolve the 0 in the denominator.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K