Тёмный

limit (5^x+4^x)^1/x as x goes to inf 

Prime Newtons
Подписаться 234 тыс.
Просмотров 16 тыс.
50% 1

In this video, I computed the limit of the xth root of the sum of two exponential functions using basic calc1 rules. It was an indeterminate case of inf to the power zero. There was then option of using L'hopitals rule but I opted for pure algebra for the sake of Calc 1 students.
www.customink....

Опубликовано:

 

4 окт 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 73   
@spacetimemalleable7718
@spacetimemalleable7718 3 месяца назад
Another excellent explanation! Your forte is your pace. I.E. you do NOT rush & race through the explanation as a lot of professors do.😀
@Alo762
@Alo762 5 месяцев назад
Mr PM, you are one of the best teachers I have ever seen. The way you keep the student hooked up all the way up to the final solution is just magic. And I have noticed some pedagogic tricks you have and I find them quite ingenious! I also like your way of not using too many intermediate steps.
@beragis3
@beragis3 5 месяцев назад
No kidding, I wish I had him in Calculus I back in 1987.
@m.h.6470
@m.h.6470 5 месяцев назад
Solution: ˣ√(5ˣ + 4ˣ) = ˣ√((1.25 * 4)ˣ + 4ˣ) = ˣ√(1.25ˣ * 4ˣ + 4ˣ) = ˣ√(4ˣ * (1.25ˣ + 1)) = ˣ√4ˣ * ˣ√(1.25ˣ + 1) = 4 * ˣ√(1.25ˣ + 1) In the Limit the "+1" become negligible and we end up with: = 4 * ˣ√1.25ˣ = 4 * 1.25 = 5
@KasosKuchKhaan
@KasosKuchKhaan 5 месяцев назад
imagine using decimal numbers in math
@aavalos7760
@aavalos7760 5 месяцев назад
Dirty maths: For x>1: 5^x < 5^x + 4^x < 2*(5^x) We can take all to the (1/x) power since 1/x is stricture decreasing towards infinity Then we get: 5 < (5^x + 4^x)^(1/x) < 5 * (2^(1/x)) Taking x to infinity squeezes our limit between to 5. Yay!
@minnyh
@minnyh 5 месяцев назад
What I really like is I can watch this with the sound off and it is still just as clear -> the steps are all correct - great stuff. We all knew it must be 5 intuitively comparing 5^x and 4^x at infinity - but intuition is not math!! You must derive it the right way. Great to go back in time to my undergraduate days and see a good teacher provide the clarity. Thank you. I very much enjoy your channel. 👍👍 Please keep doing this. Next stop for me is the epsilon / delta limit proofs - was always a brain twister for me but I know you will explain it perfectly.
@CalculusIsFun1
@CalculusIsFun1 5 месяцев назад
factor out the 5^x: distribute the 1/x power to the 5^x(1 + (4/5)^x) the 5^x/x is just 5^1 = 5 so push that out of the limit. 5 times the limit of (1 + (4/5)^x)^1/x (4/5)^x and 1/x both go to zero as x goes to infinity so that limit simplifies to (1 + 0)^0 = 1^0 = 1 we pushed out the 5 so the final answer is 5 * 1 = 5
@justabunga1
@justabunga1 5 месяцев назад
You can also think of it another way if you rewrite the base as e^ln(5^x+4^x)^(1/x)=e^(ln(5^x+4^x)/x). By taking the limit as x goes to ∞ in the exponent, it's an indeterminate form of ∞/∞. Take l'Hopital's rule, by taking the derivative of the top and derivative of the bottom. The derivative in the numerator is (5^xln(5)+4^xln(4))/(5^x+4^x). The indeterminate form is still ∞/∞. We can try to keep on going, but the indeterminate form is still ∞/∞, which is leading nowhere up to the point. We have to think outside the box by dividing everything by 5^x both the numerator and denominator. Doing so changes the simplification as (ln(5)+(4/5)^xln(4))/(1+(4/5)^x). We know that (4/5)^x is a decreasing function, so as x goes to ∞, that will go to 0. This means the limit of this exponent is ln(5). Therefore, the limit of that function is e^ln(5)=5.
@boguslawszostak1784
@boguslawszostak1784 5 месяцев назад
The "Squeezing theorem" works better here. For x>1 5^x
@RyanLewis-Johnson-wq6xs
@RyanLewis-Johnson-wq6xs Месяц назад
Limit[(5^x+4^x)^(1/x),x->∞]=5
@ARounDeRoP
@ARounDeRoP 5 месяцев назад
Great teacher indeed ❤
@bijipeter1471
@bijipeter1471 5 месяцев назад
Thank you,so much❤
@bijipeter1471
@bijipeter1471 5 месяцев назад
Thank you,sir
@algorithminc.8850
@algorithminc.8850 5 месяцев назад
Great stuff. Thanks. I look forward to checking out your channel. Subscribed. Cheers
@sivanaidoo5602
@sivanaidoo5602 5 месяцев назад
What if you took out initially 4^x instead of 5^x. This will give us a limit of 4. You got 5. So we can conclude that the limit does not exist. Just wondering???? 😮
@PrimeNewtons
@PrimeNewtons 5 месяцев назад
You won't get 4
@skwbusaidi
@skwbusaidi 4 месяца назад
The last ln to bring the power down is not necessary because we do not have indeterminate form we can work directly and he shoukd get full mark not 5/10
@MASHabibi-d2d
@MASHabibi-d2d 5 месяцев назад
Thanks for an other video master
@corneliusagu2903
@corneliusagu2903 5 месяцев назад
Nice explanation. But log(0) is undefined. So it's wrong to say log(0) = 0. Despite that, lim(y) will still be 1 as supported by the 2nd argument.
@ThenSaidHeUntoThem
@ThenSaidHeUntoThem 5 месяцев назад
No part is the video has log (0). Where did you get that?
@archanasrivastavas7258
@archanasrivastavas7258 5 месяцев назад
3:57 4/5 is less than 1 so its power infinity will be 0. Directly the answer is 5.
@VineetaSingh-m5j
@VineetaSingh-m5j 4 месяца назад
Sir I have a method Lim x-infinty (5^x + 4^x)^1/x Now factor out 5^x Lim x-infinity (5^x)^1/x (1 + (4/5)^x )^1/x Now when you put values as 4/5 is less than 1 hence 4/5 power x itend to 0 Hence the final we get 5(1+0)^0 5 answer
@ACertainMan
@ACertainMan 5 месяцев назад
At a glance the answer is 5
@Arkapravo
@Arkapravo 5 месяцев назад
It could have been solved by intuition, but I liked the rigour.
@sohampanchal8435
@sohampanchal8435 5 месяцев назад
Was the log really required? Couldn’t we just apply limits after we get 5? The bracket would have become 1.
@MokshitArora.
@MokshitArora. 5 месяцев назад
Yes . Logarithm was required . Otherwise that would be 1^∞ and that is indeterminate form If you want to avoid logarithm what you can do is substitute x to be 1/t then repeat the whole process and no logarithm is required
@tomctutor
@tomctutor 5 месяцев назад
Finding stationary points of your function using Wolfram Alpha input: solve d/dx{5(1+(4/5)^x)^(1/x)}=0 where x is real returns no real solutions. That means that the function monotonic approaches the limit. Since ((5^1+4^1)^(1/1) = 9 (i.e the value where x=1) and limit =5 then it must be monotonic decreasing to the limit. ↘
@joshdstevens
@joshdstevens 5 месяцев назад
Hm, either 1 or 9? Just take the average 🤷🏻‍♂️ works for me
@rudrapatel6890
@rudrapatel6890 5 месяцев назад
Basic jee mains question
@joaomane4831
@joaomane4831 5 месяцев назад
This one was really easy. I'm surprised you covered this but nevertheless, what I did was. Factor out 5^x and you will end up with lim ([5^x(1 + (4/5)^x)]/1^x) Then, distribute the exponents and we end up with -> (5^x)¹/x * (1 + (4/5)^x)¹/x. By one of the many properties of limits that states that the limit of the product is the product of the limits: lim (5^x)¹/x * lim (1 + (4/5)^x))¹/x which you can plug in infinity and you get exactly 5. Never stop learning.
@TheFrewah
@TheFrewah 5 месяцев назад
It becomes even easier when you realise that 5^x will be infinitely much larger than 4^x. Therefore, just ignore 4^x
@Distrunix
@Distrunix 5 месяцев назад
You can't plug in infinity in the expression (1 + (4/5)^x))¹/x to evaluate its limit. Luckily, you get the right answer in this case, but it won't be the case everytime.
@TheFrewah
@TheFrewah 5 месяцев назад
@@Distrunix No, but if you ignore 4^x, set it to zero, and simplify you get 5, the x goes away. For other problems, you have to analyse properly. There was an interesting video recently with an unexpected result.
@joaomane4831
@joaomane4831 5 месяцев назад
You can as long as you don't get any indeterminate form. ​@@Distrunix
@Distrunix
@Distrunix 5 месяцев назад
@@joaomane4831 What about the classic lim (1+1/n)^(1/n) when n goes to infinity. Explain me how we get the euler number e which is the answer with your plug in technique. 1^0 is not an indeterminate form.
@yarcowang
@yarcowang 5 месяцев назад
That is amazing! So, the result of "lim (m^x + n^x)^1/x" when m != n, it is max(m, n) , and if m>n, it is m; when m == n, it becomes the double(m or n), it is 2m (or 2n); It feels like (when n tends to m), when n reaches the point of m, the result suddenly goes from m to 2m ~~ ** Can we assert that continuity is only a macro concept? In the microscopic world, they are actually discontinuities? ** ==== Sorry, forgot 2^1/x is also 1.
@TheFrewah
@TheFrewah 5 месяцев назад
In this particular case, the limit of 5^x will be infinitely much larger than 4^x as x goes to infinity and you can therefore ignore 4^x because you want the x’th root. It is zero for all intent and purpose. So it simplifies as (5^x)^1/x) which is 5.
@РусскийПатриотЯша
@РусскийПатриотЯша 5 месяцев назад
May I ask why you rewrote the answer as 5? I did get to e^0 = 1 but the last part… I didn’t understand that, please?
@CalculusIsFun1
@CalculusIsFun1 5 месяцев назад
He did it an unnecessary way. Once you pull out the 5^x, distribute the power and get 5 * (1 + (4/5)^x)^1/x the 5 gets pushed out of the limit as it is a constant. the limit as x approaches infinity of (1 + (4/5)^x)^(1/x) is really easy. as x goes to infinity both the (4/5)^x term and the 1/x exponent go to zero so it simplifies to (1 + 0)^0 = 1^0 = 1 you pushed the 5 out of the limit at the very beginning so now you must account for it here. 5 * 1 = 5
@РусскийПатриотЯша
@@CalculusIsFun1 I can now understand that myself, sorry for such late feedback, I was busy studying and still am for university, again thanks for helping out.
@WagesOfDestruction
@WagesOfDestruction 5 месяцев назад
u would have said that (5^x+4^x) at x-infi is 5^x so the answer is 5
@robot8324
@robot8324 5 месяцев назад
Wt a chad
@maniuspugnator
@maniuspugnator 5 месяцев назад
but what if we factored out the 4^x?
@anderslvolljohansen1556
@anderslvolljohansen1556 5 месяцев назад
(1+5^x/4^x) goes to infinity as x goes to infinity, while (1+4^x/5^x) goes to 1 as x goes to infinity.
@keinKlarname
@keinKlarname 5 месяцев назад
@@anderslvolljohansen1556 But (1+(5/4)^x)^(1/x) goes to 5/4
@nicolascamargo8339
@nicolascamargo8339 5 месяцев назад
5/4>1, so (5/4)^x when x tends to infinity goes to infinity while 4/5
@maniuspugnator
@maniuspugnator 5 месяцев назад
@@nicolascamargo8339 no me hablo este explanacion, porque claro que ambos los factorizaciones tiene que funcionar. Creo que ese seria por convertir la expresion a algo como definicion de numero euler. Yo no hablo español asi mi lengua madre, lo siento por los errores. Gracias por la respuesta.
@nicolascamargo8339
@nicolascamargo8339 5 месяцев назад
@@maniuspugnator Revise haber si quedo
@kennethgee2004
@kennethgee2004 5 месяцев назад
This just not seem correct though. what you have on the inside is justified as the lim of (1+1/n)^n as x->infinity is the definition of e. You need to rewrite that inner part in terms we can handle. it seems you got a 0*0 situation that is indeterminate and the ln of the limit of y is not justified.
@tomctutor
@tomctutor 5 месяцев назад
No its like (1 + a^n)^(1/n) and not (1+a/n)^n =e^a which is totally different limit.
@kennethgee2004
@kennethgee2004 5 месяцев назад
@@tomctutor And this is missing the point though that the justification in the video is not good enough. We need to show the work more on this one to justify 0*0.
@tomctutor
@tomctutor 5 месяцев назад
@@kennethgee2004 @9:57 he shows rhs =0*0 which is not an indeterminate form, if that is what you mean! Remember the log function is 1:1 and continuous so that justifies his taking logs both sides.
@kennethgee2004
@kennethgee2004 5 месяцев назад
@@tomctutor well yes i agree that the log is continuous, but that does not mean you can just simply say that it is a value when you have a function raised to the power of a function. This was the point i was making with the definition of e. And I am not even arguing against the result of 5. My concern is with how the answer was justified. I see a 0*0 situation as the results of a limit so I cannot draw a conclusion without further work.
@tomctutor
@tomctutor 5 месяцев назад
​@@kennethgee2004 Without sounding repetitive; 0*0 is *not* an indeterminate form.
@TheFrewah
@TheFrewah 5 месяцев назад
On 2nd thought, I realised that this problem is really easy since the limit of 5^x is infinitely much larger than 4^x as x goes to infinity. For all intent amd purpose, it is zero. So it simplifies as 5^X^(1/x) which is 5 and that’s the answer. I wasn’t in math mode for the first minutes…
@misterj.a91
@misterj.a91 5 месяцев назад
I feel like you did many useless work. I think you could have just computed it when you had 5*(1+(4/5)^x)^1/x. 1/x is going to 0. (4/5)^x is also going to 0 as 4/5
@PrimeNewtons
@PrimeNewtons 5 месяцев назад
You can't double compute limits
@misterj.a91
@misterj.a91 5 месяцев назад
@@PrimeNewtons I didn't know. Thanks
@fullaccess2645
@fullaccess2645 5 месяцев назад
@@PrimeNewtons Sorry but I don't understand what you mean by "double compute" a limit. Could you please clarify?
@jumpman8282
@jumpman8282 5 месяцев назад
@@fullaccess2645 By double computing he means that we are computing the limit of the base, (1 + (4∕ 5)^𝑥) → 1 and the limit of the exponent, (1 ∕ 𝑥) → 0 and then we calculate the result, 1⁰ = 1. The classic example of where doing so doesn't work is lim 𝑥→∞ (1 + 1 ∕ 𝑥)^𝑥. The limit of the base is 1 and the limit of the exponent is ∞. 1^∞ = 1, but the correct answer is 𝑒 ≈ 2.71828.
@fullaccess2645
@fullaccess2645 5 месяцев назад
@@jumpman8282 I thought that was fine so long as you dont get an indeterminate form 1^∞, 0^0 or ∞^0
@Zerotoinfinityroad
@Zerotoinfinityroad 5 месяцев назад
Pin plz ❤
@Karatemaci
@Karatemaci 5 месяцев назад
At 10:00 the limit of ln 1/x is shown to be zero which is not the case. The correct result is minus infinite. Despite of this the final result is correct.
@PrimeNewtons
@PrimeNewtons 5 месяцев назад
Nope
Далее
An algebra problem from Finland
8:23
Просмотров 7 тыс.
Solving a Quartic Equation
17:08
Просмотров 113 тыс.
Учёные из Тринидад и Тобаго
00:23
LOLLIPOP-SCHUTZ-GADGET 🍭 DAS BRAUCHST DU!
00:28
finally 0^0 approaches 0 (after 6 years!)
14:50
Просмотров 476 тыс.
Solving a golden equation
14:45
Просмотров 11 тыс.
'Proof' of L'Hospital's Rule
10:44
Просмотров 24 тыс.
Researchers thought this was a bug (Borwein integrals)
17:26
A Diophantine Equation  @pkqualitymath1234
14:11
Просмотров 15 тыс.
if x+y=8, find the max of x^y (Lambert W function)
12:59
Show that u + v + w = 6
11:39
Просмотров 8 тыс.
Учёные из Тринидад и Тобаго
00:23