To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

L'Hôpital's rule

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Example application of l'Hôpital's rule to f(x) = sin(x) and g(x) = −0.5x: the function h(x) = f(x)/g(x) is undefined at x = 0, but can be completed to a continuous function on all of R by defining h(0) = f′(0)/g′(0) = −2.

L'Hôpital's rule (/ˌlpˈtɑːl/, loh-pee-TAHL) or L'Hospital's rule, also known as Bernoulli's rule, is a mathematical theorem that allows evaluating limits of indeterminate forms using derivatives. Application (or repeated application) of the rule often converts an indeterminate form to an expression that can be easily evaluated by substitution. The rule is named after the 17th-century French mathematician Guillaume De l'Hôpital. Although the rule is often attributed to De l'Hôpital, the theorem was first introduced to him in 1694 by the Swiss mathematician Johann Bernoulli.

L'Hôpital's rule states that for functions f and g which are defined on an open interval I and differentiable on for a (possibly infinite) accumulation point c of I, if and for all x in I with xc, and exists, then

The differentiation of the numerator and denominator often simplifies the quotient or converts it to a limit that can be directly evaluated.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    1 363 602
    1 276 028
    795 088
    159 701
    1 591 012
  • Introduction to l'Hôpital's rule | Derivative applications | Differential Calculus | Khan Academy
  • L'hopital's rule
  • L'hospital's Rule Indeterminate Forms, Limits at Infinity, Ln, Trig & Exponential Functions Calculus
  • Understanding Limits and L'Hospital's Rule
  • Limits, L'Hôpital's rule, and epsilon delta definitions | Chapter 7, Essence of calculus

Transcription

Most of what we do early on when we first learn about calculus is to use limits. We use limits to figure out derivatives of functions. In fact, the definition of a derivative uses the notion of a limit. It's a slope around the point as we take the limit of points closer and closer to the point in question. And you've seen that many, many, many times over. In this video I guess we're going to do it in the opposite direction. We're going to use derivatives to figure out limits. And in particular, limits that end up in indeterminate form. And when I say by indeterminate form I mean that when we just take the limit as it is, we end up with something like 0/0, or infinity over infinity, or negative infinity over infinity, or maybe negative infinity over negative infinity, or positive infinity over negative infinity. All of these are indeterminate, undefined forms. And to do that we're going to use l'Hopital's rule. And in this video I'm just going to show you what l'Hoptial's rule says and how to apply it because it's fairly straightforward, and it's actually a very useful tool sometimes if you're in some type of a math competition and they ask you to find a difficult limit that when you just plug the numbers in you get something like this. L'Hopital's rule is normally what they are testing you for. And in a future video I might prove it, but that gets a little bit more involved. The application is actually reasonably straightforward. So what l'Hopital's rule tells us that if we have-- and I'll do it in abstract form first, but I think when I show you the example it will all be made clear. That if the limit as x roaches c of f of x is equal to 0, and the limit as x approaches c of g of x is equal to 0, and-- and this is another and-- and the limit as x approaches c of f prime of x over g prime of x exists and it equals L. then-- so all of these conditions have to be met. This is the indeterminate form of 0/0, so this is the first case. Then we can say that the limit as x approaches c of f of x over g of x is also going to be equal to L. So this might seem a little bit bizarre to you right now, and I'm actually going to write the other case, and then I'll do an example. We'll do multiple examples and the examples are going to make it all clear. So this is the first case and the example we're going to do is actually going to be an example of this case. Now the other case is if the limit as x approaches c of f of x is equal to positive or negative infinity, and the limit as x approaches c of g of x is equal to positive or negative infinity, and the limit of I guess you could say the quotient of the derivatives exists, and the limit as x approaches c of f prime of x over g prime of x is equal to L. Then we can make this same statement again. Let me just copy that out. Edit, copy, and then let me paste it. So in either of these two situations just to kind of make sure you understand what you're looking at, this is the situation where if you just tried to evaluate this limit right here you're going to get f of c, which is 0. Or the limit as x approaches c of f of x over the limit as x approaches c of g of x. That's going to give you 0/0. And so you say, hey, I don't know what that limit is? But this says, well, look. If this limit exists, I could take the derivative of each of these functions and then try to evaluate that limit. And if I get a number, if that exists, then they're going to be the same limit. This is a situation where when we take the limit we get infinity over infinity, or negative infinity or positive infinity over positive or negative infinity. So these are the two indeterminate forms. And to make it all clear let me just show you an example because I think this will make things a lot more clear. So let's say we are trying to find the limit-- I'll do this in a new color. Let me do it in this purplish color. Let's say we wanted to find the limit as x approaches 0 of sine of x over x. Now if we just view this, if we just try to evaluate it at 0 or take the limit as we approach 0 in each of these functions, we're going to get something that looks like 0/0. Sine of 0 is 0. Or the limit as x approaches 0 of sine of x is 0. And obviously, as x approaches 0 of x, that's also going to be 0. So this is our indeterminate form. And if you want to think about it, this is our f of x, that f of x right there is the sine of x. And our g of x, this g of x right there for this first case, is the x. g of x is equal to x and f of x is equal to sine of x. And notice, well, we definitely know that this meets the first two constraints. The limit as x, and in this case, c is 0. The limit as x approaches 0 of sine of sine of x is 0, and the limit as x approaches 0 of x is also equal to 0. So we get our indeterminate form. So let's see, at least, whether this limit even exists. If we take the derivative of f of x and we put that over the derivative of g of x, and take the limit as x approaches 0 in this case, that's our c. Let's see if this limit exists. So I'll do that in the blue. So let me write the derivatives of the two functions. So f prime of x. If f of x is sine of x, what's f prime of x? Well, it's just cosine of x. You've learned that many times. And if g of x is x, what is g prime of x? That's super easy. The derivative of x is just 1. Let's try to take the limit as x approaches 0 of f prime of x over g prime of x-- over their derivatives. So that's going to be the limit as x approaches 0 of cosine of x over 1. I wrote that 1 a little strange. And this is pretty straightforward. What is this going to be? Well, as x approaches 0 of cosine of x, that's going to be equal to 1. And obviously, the limit as x approaches 0 of 1, that's also going to be equal to 1. So in this situation we just saw that the limit as x approaches-- our c in this case is 0. As x approaches 0 of f prime of x over g prime of x is equal to 1. This limit exists and it equals 1, so we've met all of the conditions. This is the case we're dealing with. Limit as x approaches 0 of sine of x is equal to 0. Limit as z approaches 0 of x is also equal to 0. The limit of the derivative of sine of x over the derivative of x, which is cosine of x over 1-- we found this to be equal to 1. All of these top conditions are met, so then we know this must be the case. That the limit as x approaches 0 of sine of x over x must be equal to 1. It must be the same limit as this value right here where we take the derivative of the f of x and of the g of x. I'll do more examples in the next few videos and I think it'll make it a lot more concrete.

History

Guillaume de l'Hôpital (also written l'Hospital[a]) published this rule in his 1696 book Analyse des Infiniment Petits pour l'Intelligence des Lignes Courbes (literal translation: Analysis of the Infinitely Small for the Understanding of Curved Lines), the first textbook on differential calculus.[1][b] However, it is believed that the rule was discovered by the Swiss mathematician Johann Bernoulli.[3]

General form

The general form of L'Hôpital's rule covers many cases. Let c and L be extended real numbers (i.e., real numbers, positive infinity, or negative infinity). Let I be an open interval containing c (for a two-sided limit) or an open interval with endpoint c (for a one-sided limit, or a limit at infinity if c is infinite). The real valued functions f and g are assumed to be differentiable on I except possibly at c, and additionally on I except possibly at c. It is also assumed that Thus, the rule applies to situations in which the ratio of the derivatives has a finite or infinite limit, but not to situations in which that ratio fluctuates permanently as x gets closer and closer to c.

If eitherorthenAlthough we have written xc throughout, the limits may also be one-sided limits (xc+ or xc), when c is a finite endpoint of I.


In the second case, the hypothesis that f diverges to infinity is not used in the proof (see note at the end of the proof section); thus, while the conditions of the rule are normally stated as above, the second sufficient condition for the rule's procedure to be valid can be more briefly stated as

The hypothesis that appears most commonly in the literature, but some authors sidestep this hypothesis by adding other hypotheses elsewhere. One method[4] is to define the limit of a function with the additional requirement that the limiting function is defined everywhere on the relevant interval I except possibly at c.[c] Another method[5] is to require that both f and g be differentiable everywhere on an interval containing c.

Cases where theorem cannot be applied (Necessity of conditions)

All four conditions for L'Hôpital's rule are necessary:

  1. Indeterminacy of form: or  ; and
  2. Differentiability of functions: and are differentiable on an open interval except possibly at a point contained in (the same point from the limit) ; and
  3. Non-zero derivative of denominator: for all in with  ; and
  4. Existence of limit of the quotient of the derivatives: exists.

Where one of the above conditions is not satisfied, L'Hôpital's rule is not valid in general, and so it cannot always be applied.

Form is not indeterminate

The necessity of the first condition can be seen by considering the counterexample where the functions are and and the limit is .

The first condition is not satisfied for this counterexample because and . This means that the form is not indeterminate.

The second and third conditions are satisfied by and . The fourth condition is also satisfied with .

But, L'Hôpital's rule fails in this counterexample, since .

Differentiability of functions

Differentiability of functions is a requirement because if a function is not differentiable, then the derivative of the functions is not guaranteed to exist at each point in . The fact that is an open interval is grandfathered in from the hypothesis of the Cauchy's mean value theorem. The notable exception of the possibility of the functions being not differentiable at exists because L'Hôpital's rule only requires the derivative to exist as the function approaches ; the derivative does not need to be taken at .

For example, let , , and . In this case, is not differentiable at . However, since is differentiable everywhere except , then still exists. Thus, since

and exists, L'Hôpital's rule still holds.

Derivative of denominator is zero

The necessity of the condition that near can be seen by the following counterexample due to Otto Stolz.[6] Let and Then there is no limit for as However,

which tends to 0 as . Further examples of this type were found by Ralph P. Boas Jr.[7]

Limit of derivatives does not exist

The requirement that the limit

exists is essential. Without this condition, or may exhibit undamped oscillations as approaches , in which case L'Hôpital's rule does not apply. For example, if , and , then

this expression does not approach a limit as goes to , since the cosine function oscillates between 1 and −1. But working with the original functions, can be shown to exist:

In a case such as this, all that can be concluded is that

so that if the limit of f/g exists, then it must lie between the inferior and superior limits of . (In the example above, this is true, since 1 indeed lies between 0 and 2.)

Examples

  • Here is a basic example involving the exponential function, which involves the indeterminate form 0/0 at x = 0:
  • This is a more elaborate example involving 0/0. Applying L'Hôpital's rule a single time still results in an indeterminate form. In this case, the limit may be evaluated by applying the rule three times:
  • Here is an example involving /: Repeatedly apply L'Hôpital's rule until the exponent is zero (if n is an integer) or negative (if n is fractional) to conclude that the limit is zero.
  • Here is an example involving the indeterminate form 0 · ∞ (see below), which is rewritten as the form /:
  • Here is an example involving the mortgage repayment formula and 0/0. Let P be the principal (loan amount), r the interest rate per period and n the number of periods. When r is zero, the repayment amount per period is (since only principal is being repaid); this is consistent with the formula for non-zero interest rates:
  • One can also use L'Hôpital's rule to prove the following theorem. If f is twice-differentiable in a neighborhood of x and its second derivative is continuous on this neighbourhood, then
  • Sometimes L'Hôpital's rule is invoked in a tricky way: suppose converges as x → ∞ and that converges to positive or negative infinity. Then:

    and so, exists and

    The result remains true without the added hypothesis that converges to positive or negative infinity, but the justification is then incomplete.

Complications

Sometimes L'Hôpital's rule does not lead to an answer in a finite number of steps unless some additional steps are applied. Examples include the following:

  • Two applications can lead to a return to the original expression that was to be evaluated: This situation can be dealt with by substituting and noting that y goes to infinity as x goes to infinity; with this substitution, this problem can be solved with a single application of the rule: Alternatively, the numerator and denominator can both be multiplied by at which point L'Hôpital's rule can immediately be applied successfully:[8]
  • An arbitrarily large number of applications may never lead to an answer even without repeating:This situation too can be dealt with by a transformation of variables, in this case : Again, an alternative approach is to multiply numerator and denominator by before applying L'Hôpital's rule:

A common pitfall is using L'Hôpital's rule with some circular reasoning to compute a derivative via a difference quotient. For example, consider the task of proving the derivative formula for powers of x:

Applying L'Hôpital's rule and finding the derivatives with respect to h of the numerator and the denominator yields nxn−1 as expected. However, differentiating the numerator requires the use of the very fact that is being proven. This is an example of begging the question, since one may not assume the fact to be proven during the course of the proof.

A similar pitfall occurs in the calculation of Proving that differentiating gives involves calculating the difference quotient in the first place, so a different method such as squeeze theorem must be used instead.

Other indeterminate forms

Other indeterminate forms, such as 1, 00, 0, 0 · ∞, and ∞ − ∞, can sometimes be evaluated using L'Hôpital's rule. For example, to evaluate a limit involving ∞ − ∞, convert the difference of two functions to a quotient:

where L'Hôpital's rule is applied when going from (1) to (2) and again when going from (3) to (4).

L'Hôpital's rule can be used on indeterminate forms involving exponents by using logarithms to "move the exponent down". Here is an example involving the indeterminate form 00:

It is valid to move the limit inside the exponential function because the exponential function is continuous. Now the exponent has been "moved down". The limit is of the indeterminate form 0 · ∞, but as shown in an example above, l'Hôpital's rule may be used to determine that

Thus

The following table lists the most common indeterminate forms, and the transformations for applying l'Hôpital's rule:

Indeterminate form Conditions Transformation to
0/0
/

Stolz–Cesàro theorem

The Stolz–Cesàro theorem is a similar result involving limits of sequences, but it uses finite difference operators rather than derivatives.

Geometric interpretation

Consider the curve in the plane whose x-coordinate is given by g(t) and whose y-coordinate is given by f(t), with both functions continuous, i.e., the locus of points of the form [g(t), f(t)]. Suppose f(c) = g(c) = 0. The limit of the ratio f(t)/g(t) as tc is the slope of the tangent to the curve at the point [g(c), f(c)] = [0,0]. The tangent to the curve at the point [g(t), f(t)] is given by [g′(t), f′(t)]. L'Hôpital's rule then states that the slope of the curve when t = c is the limit of the slope of the tangent to the curve as the curve approaches the origin, provided that this is defined.

Proof of L'Hôpital's rule

Special case

The proof of L'Hôpital's rule is simple in the case where f and g are continuously differentiable at the point c and where a finite limit is found after the first round of differentiation. It is not a proof of the general L'Hôpital's rule because it is stricter in its definition, requiring both continuous differentiability and that c be a real number. Since many common functions have continuous derivatives (e.g. polynomials, sine and cosine, exponential functions), it is a special case worthy of attention.

Suppose that f and g are continuously differentiable at a real number c, that , and that . Then

This follows from the difference-quotient definition of the derivative. The last equality follows from the continuity of the derivatives at c. The limit in the conclusion is not indeterminate because .

The proof of a more general version of L'Hôpital's rule is given below.

General proof

The following proof is due to Taylor (1952), where a unified proof for the and indeterminate forms is given. Taylor notes that different proofs may be found in Lettenmeyer (1936) and Wazewski (1949).

Let f and g be functions satisfying the hypotheses in the General form section. Let be the open interval in the hypothesis with endpoint c. Considering that on this interval and g is continuous, can be chosen smaller so that g is nonzero on .[d]

For each x in the interval, define and as ranges over all values between x and c. (The symbols inf and sup denote the infimum and supremum.)

From the differentiability of f and g on , Cauchy's mean value theorem ensures that for any two distinct points x and y in there exists a between x and y such that . Consequently, for all choices of distinct x and y in the interval. The value g(x)-g(y) is always nonzero for distinct x and y in the interval, for if it was not, the mean value theorem would imply the existence of a p between x and y such that g' (p)=0.

The definition of m(x) and M(x) will result in an extended real number, and so it is possible for them to take on the values ±∞. In the following two cases, m(x) and M(x) will establish bounds on the ratio f/g.

Case 1:

For any x in the interval , and point y between x and c,

and therefore as y approaches c, and become zero, and so

Case 2:

For every x in the interval , define . For every point y between x and c,

As y approaches c, both and become zero, and therefore

The limit superior and limit inferior are necessary since the existence of the limit of f/g has not yet been established.

It is also the case that

[e] and

and

In case 1, the squeeze theorem establishes that exists and is equal to L. In the case 2, and the squeeze theorem again asserts that , and so the limit exists and is equal to L. This is the result that was to be proven.

In case 2 the assumption that f(x) diverges to infinity was not used within the proof. This means that if |g(x)| diverges to infinity as x approaches c and both f and g satisfy the hypotheses of L'Hôpital's rule, then no additional assumption is needed about the limit of f(x): It could even be the case that the limit of f(x) does not exist. In this case, L'Hopital's theorem is actually a consequence of Cesàro–Stolz.[9]

In the case when |g(x)| diverges to infinity as x approaches c and f(x) converges to a finite limit at c, then L'Hôpital's rule would be applicable, but not absolutely necessary, since basic limit calculus will show that the limit of f(x)/g(x) as x approaches c must be zero.

Corollary

A simple but very useful consequence of L'Hopital's rule is a well-known criterion for differentiability. It states the following: suppose that f is continuous at a, and that exists for all x in some open interval containing a, except perhaps for . Suppose, moreover, that exists. Then also exists and

In particular, f' is also continuous at a.

Proof

Consider the functions and . The continuity of f at a tells us that . Moreover, since a polynomial function is always continuous everywhere. Applying L'Hopital's rule shows that .

See also

Notes

  1. ^ In the 17th and 18th centuries, the name was commonly spelled "l'Hospital", and he himself spelled his name that way. Since then, French spellings have changed: the silent 's' has been removed and replaced with a circumflex over the preceding vowel.
  2. ^ "Proposition I. Problême. Soit une ligne courbe AMD (AP = x, PM = y, AB = a [see Figure 130] ) telle que la valeur de l'appliquée y soit exprimée par une fraction, dont le numérateur & le dénominateur deviennent chacun zero lorsque x = a, c'est à dire lorsque le point P tombe sur le point donné B. On demande quelle doit être alors la valeur de l'appliquée BD. [Solution: ]...si l'on prend la difference du numérateur, & qu'on la divise par la difference du denominateur, apres avoir fait x = a = Ab ou AB, l'on aura la valeur cherchée de l'appliquée bd ou BD." Translation : "Let there be a curve AMD (where AP = X, PM = y, AB = a) such that the value of the ordinate y is expressed by a fraction whose numerator and denominator each become zero when x = a; that is, when the point P falls on the given point B. One asks what shall then be the value of the ordinate BD. [Solution: ]... if one takes the differential of the numerator and if one divides it by the differential of the denominator, after having set x = a = Ab or AB, one will have the value [that was] sought of the ordinate bd or BD."[2]
  3. ^ The functional analysis definition of the limit of a function does not require the existence of such an interval.
  4. ^ Since g' is nonzero and g is continuous on the interval, it is impossible for g to be zero more than once on the interval. If it had two zeros, the mean value theorem would assert the existence of a point p in the interval between the zeros such that g' (p) = 0. So either g is already nonzero on the interval, or else the interval can be reduced in size so as not to contain the single zero of g.
  5. ^ The limits and both exist as they feature nondecreasing and nonincreasing functions of x, respectively. Consider a sequence . Then , as the inequality holds for each i; this yields the inequalities The next step is to show . Fix a sequence of numbers such that , and a sequence . For each i, choose such that , by the definition of . Thus as desired. The argument that is similar.

References

  1. ^ O'Connor, John J.; Robertson, Edmund F. "De L'Hopital biography". The MacTutor History of Mathematics archive. Scotland: School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews. Retrieved 21 December 2008.
  2. ^ L'Hospital (1696). Analyse des infiniment petits. pp. 145–146.
  3. ^ Boyer, Carl B.; Merzbach, Uta C. (2011). A History of Mathematics (3rd illustrated ed.). John Wiley & Sons. p. 321. ISBN 978-0-470-63056-3. Extract of page 321
  4. ^ (Chatterjee 2005, p. 291)
  5. ^ (Krantz 2004, p.79)
  6. ^ Stolz, Otto (1879). "Ueber die Grenzwerthe der Quotienten" [About the limits of quotients]. Mathematische Annalen (in German). 15 (3–4): 556–559. doi:10.1007/bf02086277. S2CID 122473933.
  7. ^ Boas Jr., Ralph P. (1986). "Counterexamples to L'Hopital's Rule". American Mathematical Monthly. 93 (8): 644–645. doi:10.1080/00029890.1986.11971912. JSTOR 2322330.
  8. ^ Multiplying by instead yields a solution to the limit without need for l'Hôpital's rule.
  9. ^ "L'Hopital's Theorem". IMOmath. International Mathematical Olympiad.

Sources

This page was last edited on 27 June 2024, at 05:35
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.