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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the limit of the function x / ln(x) as x approaches 1. Participants are exploring the implications of reaching a semi-indeterminate form and the behavior of the function near this point.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of L'Hopital's Rule and algebraic manipulation to address the limit. Some express confusion about how to handle the natural logarithm in the denominator, while others question the validity of certain manipulations. There are also discussions about the nature of limits when approaching from different sides.

Discussion Status

The conversation includes various interpretations of the limit's existence, with some participants asserting that the limit does not exist due to the behavior of the function as x approaches 1. Others suggest alternative approaches and express differing opinions on the manipulations being discussed.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the limit yielding a semi-indeterminate form and the implications of approaching from both sides, which raises questions about the continuity and behavior of the function at the point of interest.

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
4K
  • · 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
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K