x x x x x x x
Find the third derivative of the function above at x = 1 .
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
⌣ ¨
Follow up question: find a general formula for the n th derivative of n x at x = 1 .
Hi, Mr Otto, you seems like a pretty cool guy (understatement), can I have your email or something so we can communicate further? I want to learn how to be a sage like you.
Log in to reply
I'm no sage, trust me ;) But, yes, I would love to be in touch... I'm on Facebook, under the name Otto K. Bretscher, and a good e-mail to reach me is okb@swissmail.org. I'm pretty active on Brilliant now, but that will have to change soon as I get back into teaching... I will start teaching a Summer Programme in Calculus at Harvard soon, and before that I will travel a bit in Europe. Take care and stay in touch!
Log in to reply
Oh I sent you an email already! You can delete that comment to hide your email.
We use the concept from Otto Bretscher's solution with the tetration notation applied. We want to find the 3rd derivative of 7 ( x + 1 ) at x = 0 . Consider its Maclaurin Series.
Brief synopsis:
Step 1 : Start with the number 1.
Step 2 : Multiply it by the series of ln ( x + 1 ) .
Step 3 : Multiply it by ( x + 1 ) ,
Step 4 : Exponentiate it: e previous expression .
Step 5 : Repeat steps 2 to 4 for another 6 times.
Step 6 : Terminate algorithm. Find the coefficient of x 3 and multiply it by 3 ! = 6 . Do victory dance.
Okay. Here's the full working. Since we're only interested in the 3rd derivative, we only need to expand the series up to the x 3 -term.
⇒ ln ( x + 1 ) = x − 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 − O ( x 4 )
⇒ ( x + 1 ) ln ( x + 1 ) = x + 2 x 2 − 6 x 3 + O ( x 4 ) .
Expontentiate it: ⇒ e y = 1 + y + 2 y 2 + 6 y 3 + O ( y 4 ) .
⇒ e ( x + 1 ) ln ( x + 1 ) = x + 2 x 2 − 6 x 3 + … = ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = 1 + x + 2 x 2 + 2 x 3 + O ( x 4 )
⇒ ln ( x + 1 ) ⋅ ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = x + 2 x 2 + 6 5 x 3 + O ( x 4 ) .
⇒ e ln ( x + 1 ) ⋅ ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = 1 + x + x 2 + 2 3 x 3 + O ( x 4 )
⇒ ln ( x + 1 ) ⋅ ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = x + 2 x 2 + 6 5 x 3 + O ( x 4 ) .
⇒ e ln ( x + 1 ) ⋅ ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = 4 ( x + 1 ) = 1 + x + x 2 + 2 3 x 3 + O ( x 4 )
The first 4 terms of the series of 4 ( x + 1 ) is the same as 3 ( x + 1 ) . If we repeat steps 2 to 4 another 3 more times, we will still conclude that sum of the first four terms of 7 ( x + 1 ) as 1 + x + x 2 + 2 3 x 3 .
By Maclaurin Series, the third derivative of 7 ( x + 1 ) satisfies 2 3 = 3 ! d x 3 d 3 [ 7 ( x + 1 ) ] ⇒ d x 3 d 3 [ 7 ( x + 1 ) ] = 2 3 × 3 ! = 9 .
@Otto Bretscher , see this note .
Hmm, all to complicated. I use a series expansion of the power tower in terms of ln(x) due to Galidakis (you can find it on the Wolfram site under power tower). I omit the (simple) calcutation, but want to note that as a result f'''(1)=9 for every power tower of height at least 3.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Based on Pi Han Goh's brilliant note, we can generalise:
Let T n ( f ( x ) ) be the Taylor polynomial of f ( x ) at x = 0 .
If T n ( f ( x ) ) = T n ( g ( x ) ) for two functions, then T n + 1 ( ln ( x + 1 ) f ( x ) ) = T n + 1 ( ln ( x + 1 ) g ( x ) ) ; since ln ( x + 1 ) does not have a constant term, the degree gets "pushed up". This in turn implies that T n + 1 ( ( x + 1 ) f ( x ) ) = T n + 1 ( ( x + 1 ) g ( x ) ) , by exponentiation.
Now T 1 ( x + 1 ) = T 1 ( ( x + 1 ) x + 1 ) , by inspection ; applying the above observation n − 1 times, we find that T n ( n ( x + 1 ) ) = T n ( n + 1 ( x + 1 ) ) and therefore T n ( n ( x + 1 ) ) = T n ( m ( x + 1 ) ) for all m ≥ n .
Let D n ( f ( x ) ) be the nth derivative of f ( x ) at x = 0 . Since D n is determined by T n , we have D n ( n ( x + 1 ) ) = D n ( m ( x + 1 ) ) for all m ≥ n .
In particular, D 3 ( 7 ( x + 1 ) ) = D 3 ( 3 ( x + 1 ) ) = 9 , as we saw in Pi Han Goh's earlier problem.