x → ∞ lim x 1 ∫ 1 x t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) d t
The limit above has a closed form. Find the limit to 3 decimal places.
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.
great work
Superb u are awesome mind blowing how can u get these ideas
Log in to reply
Thank you, nevertheless, this problem and solution are not mine. If you want a problem from myself,for instance check this last one
Suppose that f ( t ) is a continuous function on [ 1 , ∞ ) such that lim t → ∞ f ( t ) = L . Then x 1 ∫ 1 x f ( t ) d t − L = x 1 ∫ 1 x [ f ( t ) − L ] d t − x L Given ϵ > 0 find X > 1 such that ∣ f ( t ) − L ∣ < ϵ for all t > X . Then ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ x 1 ∫ 1 x f ( t ) d t − L ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ≤ x 1 ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∫ 1 X [ f ( t ) − L ] d t ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ + ϵ x x − X + x ∣ L ∣ ≤ ϵ + x 1 ( ( X − 1 ) 1 ≤ t ≤ X sup ∣ f ( t ) − L ∣ + ∣ L ∣ ) for all x > X , so we can find Y > X such that ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ x 1 ∫ 1 x f ( t ) d t − L ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ < 2 ϵ for all x > Y . In other words, we have shown that x → ∞ lim x 1 ∫ 1 x f ( t ) d t = L In this case we have f ( t ) = t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) = t 1 cot ( 2 ( 2 t + 1 ) π ) = g ( 2 ( 2 t + 1 ) π ) cos ( 2 ( 2 t + 1 ) π ) × π t 2 ( 2 t + 1 ) Where g ( x ) = x sin x . Since g ( x ) → 1 as x → 0 , we deduce that f ( t ) → π 4 as t → ∞ . Thus the solution to this problem is π 4 = 1 . 2 7 3 .
Hello again, good morning...I never thought to do it like this... Right now, I'm a little confused... However, it seems "correct"... The solution is π 4 . I'll see slowly this proof later...The first part seems very interesting, nevertheless... in the penultime line I think there is a typo. Shouldn't it be f ( t ) = t 1 cot ( 2 ( 2 t + 1 ) π ) ? Could you develope the last lines a little bit more, please? ... Thank you, anyway...
Log in to reply
Typo corrected. The last bit of the argument should now be clear.
Log in to reply
The last bit is now clear, thank you very much. I'm reviewing again the first part and I'm starting to fit things, and I think this is again unbelievable. You are fantastic... you are able to take a particular problem and generalize the result and create postulates that can be used to solve other problems. I think there are very few people who can do this. Did you know?
Log in to reply
@Guillermo Templado – I am glad you liked it. However, I did not do anything that special. Mathematics is about proving general results, after all.
Why couldn't you just directly use L'hopital (accompanied with fundamental theorem of calculus part 1), and we're left to prove that x → ∞ lim x 1 tan ( 2 x + 1 π x ) = π 4 ?
Well of course, you need to show that tan ( 2 x + 1 π x ) > x for x > 1 first, which is rather trivial. So the original integral diverges to infinity.
Log in to reply
If you like, I am using de l'Hopital's rule. What I showed was simply a continuous variant of the rather better known result that if a sequence a n converges to L , then the sequence of arithmetic means n 1 j = 1 ∑ n a j → L n → ∞
Log in to reply
What I showed was simply a continuous variant of the rather better known result that if a sequence a n converges to L ,
Hmmmm, either I forgot what this means or I'm really tired right now and I can't recall this fact. Can you remind me what technique/theorem this is called? Like Mean Value theorem? Or Continuity Correction Factor? Or etc
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Have a go. Split up the sum n − 1 ∑ j = 1 n a j − L = n − 1 ∑ j = 1 n ( a j − L ) into the sum for 1 ≤ j ≤ N and N + 1 ≤ j ≤ n . For any fixed N , the first sum will tend to 0 as n → ∞ . How do you choose N to make the second sum small?
Log in to reply
@Mark Hennings – I think you're referencing Riemann Sum, but I don't see how is that relevant (yet).
Split up the sum n − 1 ∑ j = 1 n a j − L = n − 1 ∑ j = 1 n ( a j − L ) into the sum for 1 ≤ j ≤ N and N + 1 ≤ j ≤ n
Doesn't this equation simplifies to L / n = L ⇒ n = 1 ? Are you sure you wrote it correctly?
And for your question, my intuition says that it's infinity, but given that I can't understand what is going on, I'm can only guess what the intended answer is. Sorry for being ignorant, but can you spell it out for me? I've been pondering on this question for quite some time now.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Given ϵ > 0 , we can find N such that ∣ a n − L ∣ < ϵ for all n > N . This means that ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ n 1 j = N + 1 ∑ n ( a j − L ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ < n n − N ϵ < ϵ for all n > N .
The number N is fixed, and hence ∑ j = 1 N ( a j − L ) is a fixed number. Thus we can find M > N such that ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ n 1 j = 1 ∑ N ( a j − L ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ < ϵ for all n > M . This means that ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ n 1 j = 1 ∑ n a j − L ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ < 2 ϵ for all n > M . QED
Log in to reply
@Mark Hennings – Okay, I'm literally lost for words right now. I (am pretty sure I) understood what you wrote but I can't fathom how you managed to think of all these steps. Is there a prerequisite / known theorem / lemma / algorithm that you're using in your solution and in this comment? I doubt "epsilon-delta" is the only explanation I need.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – I have to say this is pretty standard bookwork. Try any good book on convergence.
Log in to reply
@Mark Hennings – Damn. I feel so ashamed right now. Okay, you should know what is my follow up question is right now:
Do you have any good book on convergence? I doubt Jame Stewart or Rudin taught these stuff
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – W.L.Ferrar wrote "Convergence", a very old OUP book. You can find scans of it on the internet, and it goes in to the properties of sequences in some detail. It was also the first book I bought as an undergraduate, many years ago!
Log in to reply
@Mark Hennings – You're the best!! Brilliant should send a notification to everyone everything you post a comment/solution. Your comments are always super duper helpful. Thanks again.
Yup, Right,I used L'Hópital twice and fundamental theorem Calculus. Do you want me to write a particular solution. Anyway, Mark's solution is a more general solution,because his first postulate envolves more possibilities. Do you want me to write my solution, Pi ? If you want it, tomorrow it will be written.
Log in to reply
YES PLEASEEEEEEE!
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Tomorrow, it will be written. I promise. Give me some time, please.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Take g : I = [ 1 , ∞ ) → R , such that g ( t ) = 2 t + 1 π t . This function is a strictly function because g ′ ( t ) = ( 2 t + 1 ) 2 π > 0 , ∀ t ∈ ( 1 , ∞ ) , and g ( 1 ) = 3 π and t → ∞ lim g ( t ) = 2 π .
Since tan ( x ) > x , ∀ x ∈ ( 4 π , 2 π ) we have: x → ∞ lim ∫ 1 x t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) d t ≥ x → ∞ lim ∫ 1 x t 1 ⋅ 2 t + 1 π t d t ≥ x → ∞ lim ∫ 1 x 2 t + 1 π d t = = 2 π ⋅ [ x → ∞ lim ln ( 2 x + 1 ) − ln ( 3 ) ] = ∞ Thus we have x → ∞ lim x 1 ∫ 1 x t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) d t = ∞ ∞ so that we can apply L'Hopital's rule and the fundamental theorem of calculus (version 1), obtaining x → ∞ lim x 1 ∫ 1 x t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) d t = x → ∞ lim x 1 tan ( 2 x + 1 π x ) = = x → ∞ lim cos ( 2 x + 1 π x ) x 1 × x → ∞ lim sin ( 2 x + 1 π x ) = 0 0 . Now, it's sufficient that there exists the first limit above because the second limit above is 1 , and applying L'Hopital's rule again for the first limit we get x → ∞ lim cos ( 2 x + 1 π x ) x 1 = x → ∞ lim − sin ( 2 x + 1 π x ) ⋅ ( 2 x + 1 ) 2 π x 2 − 1 = x → ∞ lim π x 2 ( 2 x + 1 ) 2 = π 4 . Therefore, x → ∞ lim x 1 ∫ 1 x t 1 tan ( 2 t + 1 π t ) d t = π 4