What is the significance of the number e and Euler's formula?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the significance of the number e and Euler's formula, exploring their historical context, mathematical properties, and implications in calculus and complex analysis. Participants delve into the discovery of e, its relationship with exponential functions, and the derivation of Euler's formula, examining both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the historical context of e, suggesting it emerged from the need to calculate compound interest in the 17th century.
  • There is mention of the limit definition of e, specifically \(\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n\), and the need to prove its existence using the binomial theorem.
  • One participant proposes that the equality \(e^{i\pi} + 1 = 0\) is derived from the power series representation of the exponential function, linking it to trigonometric functions.
  • Another participant emphasizes the relationship between the exponential function and its inverse, the natural logarithm, highlighting the integral definition of the logarithm.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the exact value of e and the methods to derive it, noting that it cannot be found analytically.
  • There are discussions about the Taylor expansions of sine, cosine, and the exponential function, suggesting that these lead to Euler's formula when substituting \(x\) with \(i\theta\).
  • One participant raises questions about the extension of the exponential function to the complex plane, indicating the complexity of defining \(e^z\) without prior definitions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement, particularly regarding the historical context of e and the derivation of Euler's formula. While some points are clarified, the discussion remains unresolved on several aspects, including the exact methods of deriving e and the implications of its properties.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the definitions of functions and the convergence of series. The mathematical steps involved in proving the existence of limits and the properties of e are not fully resolved.

  • #31
Right. So, after some investigation, I have found that there are two looser definitions one might use:

Definition 1:
\exp(z) is the unique function over \mathbb{C} such that:

1. \frac{d}{dz}(\exp(z)) exists, and

2. \exp(x+i0) = e^x for all real numbers x.

Definition 2
\exp(z) is the unique function over \mathbb{C} such that:

1. \frac{d}{dz}(\exp(z)) = \exp(z), and

2. \exp(0) = 1.

Either definition is sufficient, and they are equivalent.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I was bored in class so I did this, don't really know if it's any use here, but I think so and found it very interesting:

d/dx[exp(x)]=lim h->0 \frac{exp(x+h)-exp(x)}{h} = exp(x) lim h->0 \frac{exp(h)-1}{h}=exp(x) lim h->0 \frac{\sum\frac{h^k}{k!}-1}{h}, with the sum from 0 to infinity,

= exp(x) lim h->0 \frac{\sum\frac{h^k}{k!}}{h}, with the sum from 1 to infinity

= exp(x) lim h->0 \sum\frac{h^{(k-1)}}{k!}

and all terms in the sum go to zero, except the first, which goes to 1... so:

= exp(x)

so, when you define exp(x) by \sum\frac{x^k}{k!}, the deravative of exp(x) is exp(x)
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Yes, and that result would have been much easier if you differentiated the series directly, term by term. Or even if you used the limit definition, at the point \lim_{h\to 0} \frac{e^h -1}{h} you could have replaced with the series definition there, subtract one from it and then divide by h, you have the same series again.
 
  • #34
well that's what I did >_>, at least the second thing.
 
  • #35
My bad, I didn't pay attention to the intervals of summation.
 
  • #36
have you studied linear algebra? an "eigenvector" for a linear operator T is a vector v such that Tv is a scalar multiple of v. These vectors provide the most natural coordinate system appropriate to the operator T. If one wants to solve an equation like TX = Y, for X, it is easy to do if Y is expanded in terms of eigenvectors of T.

The functions e^ax provide the eigenvectors for the linear operator D (differentiation). Using them, one gets the most natural expansion of a smooth function, its Fourier series. this makes it easy to solve differential equations like Df = g, if one can expand g in a Fourier series.
 
Last edited:
  • #37
I will point out, again, that there is nothing all that magical about e. Any exponential function akx is an eigenfunction of the derivative operator.
 
  • #38
well there is something special about the eigenvalue 1. or is your point that we should say "fixed points" of the operator D, to characterize ce^x?

i.e. e^x is the unique solution of the primordial ode: Dy = y, y(0) = 1.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
805
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K