The limit as x approaches 1 of x / ln (x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter carlodelmundo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Ln
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The limit as x approaches 1 of the expression x / ln(x) does not exist due to the behavior of the function at that point. As x approaches 1 from the right, the limit approaches infinity, while from the left, it approaches negative infinity. This results in a semi-indeterminate form of 1/0, confirming that the limit is undefined. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding one-sided limits and the implications of continuous functions in limit calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with L'Hôpital's Rule
  • Knowledge of one-sided limits
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study L'Hôpital's Rule for resolving indeterminate forms
  • Learn about one-sided limits and their significance in calculus
  • Explore the concept of infinite limits and discontinuities
  • Practice with limit problems involving logarithmic functions
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, educators teaching limit concepts, and anyone looking to deepen their understanding of continuous functions and their limits.

carlodelmundo
Messages
133
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hi. I'm having problems with the limit of x --> 1 of ( x / ln(x) ).

Homework Equations



L'Hopital's Rule
Algebraic Manipulation

The Attempt at a Solution



I understand that the the limit will give me a semi-indeterminate form (that is, it's answer is 1 / 0).

What I don't understand is how I can manipulate ln (x) so it's not in the denominator. I tried thinking of ways to use e^x... but realized that multiplying by e^x does nothing. I'm presuming that we can raise both the numerator and the denominator by e^x but was not sure if it was legitimate.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you are getting the 'semi-indefinite form' 1/0, you can forget about manipulating it further. The limit doesn't exist.
 
Any time you have a ratio of two continuous functions, and just putting the value gives 1/0 (or more generally any non-zero value over 0) the limit does not exist. As x gets closer and closer to the "target value" the numerator stays close to 1 while the denominator gets close to 0. I.e. the fraction gets larger and larger. There is no limit.
 
Thanks, both. I understand it now. I made a numerical table to estimate the limit... and as you two pointed out... the limit does not exist (infinite discontinuities).
 
well i don't think so maybe I'm wrong but let's see

lim as x->1 (x/lnx) now me remove the natural lag

lim as x->1 ( e^x/ x) so as X approaches 1 we get lim x->1 (e^1/1)=e :)

and yes it's legit :)
 
Last edited:
HallsofIvy said:
Any time you have a ratio of two continuous functions, and just putting the value gives 1/0 (or more generally any non-zero value over 0) the limit does not exist. As x gets closer and closer to the "target value" the numerator stays close to 1 while the denominator gets close to 0. I.e. the fraction gets larger and larger. There is no limit.

To add to this, the limit could be infinity, -infinity, or not exist. If you have something like \lim_{x\to 0}\frac{1}{x}, x could approach 0 from the left, from the right, or from both directions. In this case, we can't put a definitive answer.

Note: This only works if you include the extended real line. If not, then it wouldn't exist at all.
 
Last edited:
icefirez said:
well i don't think so maybe I'm wrong but let's see

lim as x->1 (x/lnx) now me remove the natural lag

lim as x->1 ( e^x/ x) so as X approaches 1 we get lim x->1 (e^1/1)=e :)
What makes you think that you can remove the natural "lag" (sic) in this way?

As was already said, this limit does not exist. The two one-sided limits are as far apart as they could possibly be.
\lim_{x \to 1^+}\frac{x}{ln(x)} = \infty
while
\lim_{x \to 1^-}\frac{x}{ln(x)} = -\infty

icefirez said:
and yes it's legit :)
 
icefirez said:
well i don't think so maybe I'm wrong but let's see

lim as x->1 (x/lnx) now me remove the natural lag

lim as x->1 ( e^x/ x) so as X approaches 1 we get lim x->1 (e^1/1)=e :)

and yes it's legit :)
Actually ex/lnx cannot be simplified unlike elnx = x. For your second expression you'll get:

<br /> \lim_{x \to 1^+}e^(x/lnx) = \infty <br />
<br /> \lim_{x \to 1^-}e^(x/lnx) = 0<br />
 
Mark44 said:
What makes you think that you can remove the natural "lag" (sic) in this way?

As was already said, this limit does not exist. The two one-sided limits are as far apart as they could possibly be.
\lim_{x \to 1^+}\frac{x}{ln(x)} = \infty
while
\lim_{x \to 1^-}\frac{x}{ln(x)} = -\infty


sorry yes I'm wrong... but you don't have to be rude and I know that you have to write log instead of "LAG" but please it's not the end of world.
 
  • #10
There was nothing rude about Mark44's response.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K