What is the slope of the line tangent to the graph of
y = x x x x x . . .
at the point x = 2 ?
If your answer can be expressed as
p q k = 0 ∑ ∞ ln k ( r )
for positive, prime integers ( p , q , r ) , find p + q + r .
Note: the x's continue to infinity.
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.
As a side note, you should be careful with existence and uniqueness. For example, in your simple proof that the successive powers of 2 equals to 2, you should provide an explanation of why such a value exists. For example, it is obvious that the successive powers of 2 do not give a finite value.
You need to show that this is true:
This turns into the infinite summation
f ′ ( x ) = a → ∞ lim f ′ ( x ) ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) a + x f 2 ( x ) k = 0 ∑ a ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) k
Plus, there's a simpler way of solving it. We have y = x y , take log and differentiate with respect to x , we get d x d y ( y 1 − ln x ) = x y , set ( x , y ) = ( 2 , 2 ) gives d x d y = 1 − ln 2 2 2 , and you can recognize that this is a sum of a geometric progression.
Log in to reply
I think it is more obvious as to why it turns into the sum now, do I need to prove it more indepth?
Also, could you please post a slightly more detailed version of your method? I'm not sure how your method works.
Log in to reply
It is not obvious at all, it may appear true from a glance, but you still need to list down the steps to get to the answer.
Brian Charlesworth already did that.
By the way, the summation in question starts from k=0, not k=1. and you shouldn't write ( ln 2 ) ∞ , but you should write it as n → ∞ lim ( ln 2 ) n = 0 . or ( ln 2 ) n → 0 . And you need to show that x^x^x.... converges to 2 when x = sqrt2
Hey Trevor. Are you back at school yet? This is quite the detailed solution, (although I took the same approach as Pi Han Goh). In the text of your question I think that you'll need to have the sum starting at k = 0 rather than k = 1 , (which is indeed what you have in your solution).
Log in to reply
Yes, I'm back in school but things are going pretty smoothly now.
I took a look at Pi Han's solution and I'm not sure I understand it. I posted this problem mainly because I was messing around with these infinite stacks of x and practicing differentiation for the AP exam (and yes, I ordered an AP calc textbook for Christmas :P. Oh the nostalgia).
And thanks for fixing my problem... again XD
Log in to reply
Pi Han's method uses a combination of logarithmic and implicit differentiation. Starting with y = x y we take the natural log of both sides, (with the condition that x > 0 ), to end up with ln ( y ) = y ln ( x ) . Implicit differentiation (along with the product rule) then gives us that
y 1 d x d y = d x d y ln ( x ) + y ∗ x 1 ⟹ d x d y = x ( 1 − y ln ( x ) ) y 2 .
Then as y ( 2 ) = 2 we have that at x = 2
d x d y = 2 ( 1 − 2 ln ( 2 2 1 ) ) 4 = 1 − ln ( 2 ) 2 2 = 2 2 k = 0 ∑ ∞ ( ln ( 2 ) ) k .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
please forgive me for not including dx and dy
Define D ( g ( x ) ) = g ′ ( x ) for typing sake
y = x x x x x . . .
ln ( y ) = ln ( x ) x x x x x . . .
y y ′ = ln x ⋅ D ⎝ ⎛ x x x x x . . . ⎠ ⎞ + x ( x x x x . . . − 1 )
y ′ = ln x ⋅ D ⎝ ⎛ x x x x x . . . ⎠ ⎞ ⋅ x x x x x . . . + x x x x x . . . ⋅ x ( x x x x . . . − 1 )
Now, for visual simplicity, let y = x x x x x . . . = f ( x ) and y ′ = D ( x x x x x . . . ) = f ′ ( x )
f ′ ( x ) = f ′ ( x ) ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) + x f 2 ( x )
Substituting for itself on the right side
f ′ ( x ) = ( f ′ ( x ) ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) + x f 2 ( x ) ) ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) + x f 2 ( x )
f ′ ( x ) = f ′ ( x ) ln 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x ) + ( f ( x ) ln ( x ) ) x f 2 ( x ) + x f 2 ( x )
One more time
f ′ ( x ) = f ′ ( x ) ln 3 ( x ) f 3 ( x ) + ( f ( x ) ln ( x ) ) 2 x f 2 ( x ) + ( f ( x ) ln ( x ) ) x f 2 ( x ) + x f 2 ( x )
This turns into the infinite summation
f ′ ( x ) = a → ∞ lim f ′ ( x ) ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) a + x f 2 ( x ) k = 0 ∑ a ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) k
f ′ ( x ) = a → ∞ lim 1 − ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) a x f 2 ( x ) k = 0 ∑ a ( ln ( x ) f ( x ) ) k
Plugging in for x
f ′ ( x ) = a → ∞ lim 1 − ( ln ( 2 ) f ( 2 ) ) a 2 f 2 ( 2 ) k = 0 ∑ a ( ln ( 2 ) f ( 2 ) ) k
Quick proof 2 2 2 2 2 . . . = 2
x x x x x . . . = 2
x 2 = 2
x = 2
Plugging in f ( 2 ) = 2
f ′ ( x ) = a → ∞ lim 1 − ( ln ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ) a 2 2 2 k = 0 ∑ a ( ln ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ) k
Since ln ( 2 ) < 0 ⟹ ( ln ( 2 ) ) ∞ = 0
f ′ ( x ) = 2 2 k = 0 ∑ ∞ ln k ( 2 )
∴ p = q = r = 2 ⟶ p + q + r = 6