What Happens to x^i as x Approaches 0 from the Positive Side?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hddd123456789
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
hddd123456789
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm having to teach myself math and I guess I'm skipping ahead here but am really interested. For f(x)=x^i, the limit from the positive side I see from WolframAlpha is e^(2 i 0 to pi). Can someone please explain what the "2 i 0 to pi" means? Is it 2 times i times the set 0 to pi? Or something like that? And why is it 0 to pi? As it spins around going to zero, wouldn't it 'touch' the y-imaginary axis at one particular point?

Just thinking aloud...any help would be much appreciated :)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You can rewrite xi as

$$x^i = e^{i\ln x},$$
assuming x is real. Do you know Euler's identity?

$$e^{iy} = \cos y + i \sin y.$$

With these two pieces of information, can you see what happens as x tends to zero from above?
 
hddd123456789 said:
Can someone please explain what the "2 i 0 to pi" means?
The limit doesn't exist. However, for all positive real x, xi is constrained to lie on the unit circle. That is all you can say about the limit, and that is all that Mathematica is saying. e2i (0 to pi) might be better written as e^{i\theta}, 0\le\theta<2\pi.
 
hddd123456789 said:
Hi,

I'm having to teach myself math and I guess I'm skipping ahead here but am really interested. For f(x)=x^i, the limit from the positive side I see from WolframAlpha is e^(2 i 0 to pi). Can someone please explain what the "2 i 0 to pi" means? Is it 2 times i times the set 0 to pi? Or something like that? And why is it 0 to pi? As it spins around going to zero, wouldn't it 'touch' the y-imaginary axis at one particular point?

Just thinking aloud...any help would be much appreciated :)

"2 i (0 to pi)" means "oscillating on the range 0 to 2*i*pi".
The real part of x^i is oscillating on the range -1 to 1
The imaginary part of x^i is oscillating on the range -i to i
 
Mute said:
You can rewrite xi as

$$x^i = e^{i\ln x},$$
assuming x is real. Do you know Euler's identity?

$$e^{iy} = \cos y + i \sin y.$$

With these two pieces of information, can you see what happens as x tends to zero from above?

Yes! I had actually tried to change x^i into Euler's identity, but not only was I unable to do it at the time, I see now that it likely wouldn't have helped without the x^i = e^i*ln(x) relationship.

Basically ln(x) goes to -∞ and e^i(-∞)=cos(-∞) + i*sin(-∞), and Euler's identity only gives specific y-imaginary values for particular values of x. But since ∞ isn't a particular value of x, but an arbitrarily large value, you can't say anything specific about the limit except that it lies somewhere on the unit circle. Is that the right way to think about it?
 
hddd123456789 said:
Yes! I had actually tried to change x^i into Euler's identity, but not only was I unable to do it at the time, I see now that it likely wouldn't have helped without the x^i = e^i*ln(x) relationship.

Basically ln(x) goes to -∞ and e^i(-∞)=cos(-∞) + i*sin(-∞), and Euler's identity only gives specific y-imaginary values for particular values of x. But since ∞ isn't a particular value of x, but an arbitrarily large value, you can't say anything specific about the limit except that it lies somewhere on the unit circle. Is that the right way to think about it?

You can say something specific about the limit: it doesn't exist. The functions ##\sin x## and ##\cos x## have no limit as x approaches infinity, so this tells you that ##x^i## has no limiting value, its value just twirls around the unit circle in the complex plane faster and faster as x grows larger.
 
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