What is an Alternative Way to Prove the Derivative of e^x = e^x?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MHD93
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivative E^x
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around exploring alternative methods to prove that the derivative of the function e^x equals e^x itself. Participants are examining various approaches to understand this derivative using limits, series, and definitions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using the limit definition of the derivative, specifically the limit as x approaches 0 of (e^x - 1)/x. Some suggest applying l'Hôpital's rule or using the power series expansion for e^x. Others question the relevance of certain approaches and clarify the need to establish the limit itself.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various methods being proposed and explored. Some participants have offered guidance on potential techniques, while others are questioning the assumptions and relevance of certain arguments. There is no explicit consensus on a single method yet.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express unfamiliarity with certain mathematical tools, such as l'Hôpital's rule, which may affect their ability to engage fully with the proposed solutions. Additionally, there are discussions about the definitions and properties of the exponential function and its derivative.

MHD93
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hello
As I was trying to figure out why the derivative of e^x = e^x using the derivative definition I faced this limit:

lim (e^x - 1)/x ; x goes to 0

and I need your help, thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Have you tried applying l'hospital's rule?

That should clear things up.
 


Have you tried the power series for exp(x)?
[tex] e^{x}=1+x+\frac{x^{2}}{2}+\cdots[/tex]
 


jegues, in order to do that you would have to know the derivative of exp(x) which is what he was trying to calculate in the first place.
 


#Jegues: I don't know l'hospital's rule, but thanks for reply

#hunt mat: thank you so much, this made the problem so easy
 


Mohammad_93, one of the ways the exponential function is defined is by the fact that its derivative of this function is the exponential function itself !
 


For any positive real number, a, the derivative of [itex]a^x[/itex] is given by:

[tex]\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{a^{x+h}- a^x}{h}= \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{a^xa^h- a^x}{h}[/tex]
[tex]= \lim_{h\to 0}a^x\frac{a^h - 1}{h}= a^x\left(\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{a^h- 1}{h}[/tex]

That is, the derivative of [itex]a^x[/itex] is [itex]a^x[/itex] itself times a constant, [itex]C_a[/itex]. (Constant in the sense that it does not depend on x. It does, of course, depend on a.)

It is easy to show that, for a= 2 or a= 2.5, say, that constant is less than 1. it is equally easy to show that for a= 3 or 4, say, the constant is larger than 1. We define "e" to be the number such that
[tex]\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{e^h- 1}{h}= 1[/tex]

Another, in my opinion, simpler way to show that the derivative of [itex]e^x[/itex] is [itex]e^x[/itex] is to first define
[tex]ln(x)= \int_1^x \frac{1}{t}dt[/tex]

It is easy to see that the derivative of ln(x), by the fundamental theorem of calculus, is 1/x. You can also show that it is a 1 to 1 function from the set of positive real numbers to the set of all real numbers and so has an inverse function, exp(x), from the set of real numbers to the set of positive real numbers. One can then show that exp(x) has derivative exp(x) and that [itex]exp(x)= (exp(1))^x[/itex] where exp(1) is defined, of course, by ln(exp(1))= 1.
 


Let f(x)=e^x

Clearly:
(e^x - 1)/x = (e^x - 1)/(x-0) = ( f(x) - f(0) )/x-0 ----> f'(0) as x--> 0
 


System said:
Let f(x)=e^x

Clearly:
(e^x - 1)/x = (e^x - 1)/(x-0) = ( f(x) - f(0) )/x-0 ----> f'(0) as x--> 0
Yes, that's true but not relevant to the question of what that derivative is. The last part, (f(x)- f(0))/(x- 0)----> f'(0), is true for any function that is differentiable at x= 0. The question, really, was "How do you show that [itex]lim_{x\to 0} (e^x-1)/x= 1[/itex]".
 
  • #10


HallsofIvy said:
Another, in my opinion, simpler way to show that the derivative of [itex]e^x[/itex] is [itex]e^x[/itex] is to first define
[tex]ln(x)= \int_1^x \frac{1}{t}dt[/tex]

It is easy to see that the derivative of ln(x), by the fundamental theorem of calculus, is 1/x. You can also show that it is a 1 to 1 function from the set of positive real numbers to the set of all real numbers and so has an inverse function, exp(x), from the set of real numbers to the set of positive real numbers. One can then show that exp(x) has derivative exp(x) and that [itex]exp(x)= (exp(1))^x[/itex] where exp(1) is defined, of course, by ln(exp(1))= 1.

You don't even need to define log(x) that way. It's easy to prove that using the basic definition of e, as follows:

[tex]e = lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}\left(1+\frac{1}{x}\right)^x[/tex]

And using the definition of the natural log, again as follows:

[tex]IF x=e^y\\ THEN y = log(x)[/tex]

Then by applying the definition of a derivative, you can prove, algebraically, that the derivative of log(x) is 1/x. Then you can use that to prove the derivative of e^x without ever using an integral or the FTC.
 

Similar threads

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