Because differential calculus is based on the definition of the derivative, and the definition of the derivative involves a limit, there is a sense in which all of calculus rests on limits. In addition, the limit involved in the definition of the derivative always generates the indeterminate form . If is a differentiable function, then in the definition
not only does in the denominator, but also in the numerator, since is continuous. Remember, saying that a limit has an indeterminate form only means that we don’t yet know its value and have more work to do: indeed, limits of the form can take on any value, as is evidenced by evaluating for varying values of for a function such as .
We have learned many techniques for evaluating the limits that result from the derivative definition, including a large number of shortcut rules. In this section, we turn the situation upside-down: instead of using limits to evaluate derivatives, we explore how to use derivatives to evaluate certain limits.
Subsection2.8.1Using derivatives to evaluate indeterminate limits of the form .
Figure2.8.1.At left, the graphs of and near the value , along with their tangent line approximations and at . At right, zooming in on the point and the four graphs.
The idea demonstrated in Preview Activity 2.8.1 — that we can evaluate an indeterminate limit of the form by replacing each of the numerator and denominator with their local linearizations at the point of interest — can be generalized in a way that enables us to evaluate a wide range of limits. We have a function that can be written as a quotient , where and are both differentiable at and for which . We would like to evaluate the indeterminate limit given by .Figure 2.8.1 illustrates the situation. We see that both and have an -intercept at . Their respective tangent line approximations and at are also shown in the figure. We can take advantage of the fact that a function and its tangent line approximation become indistinguishable as .
First, let’s recall that and . Because is getting arbitrarily close to when we take the limit, we can replace with and replace with , and thus we observe that
Next, we remember that both and , which is precisely what makes the original limit indeterminate. Substituting these values for and in the limit above, we now have
In practice, we typically work with a slightly more general version of L’Hôpital’s Rule, which states that (under the identical assumptions as the boxed rule above and the extra assumption that is continuous at )
provided the righthand limit exists. This form reflects the basic idea of L’Hôpital’s Rule: if produces an indeterminate limit of form as , that limit is equivalent to the limit of the quotient of the two functions’ derivatives, .
By replacing the numerator and denominator with their respective derivatives, we often replace an indeterminate limit with one whose value we can easily determine.
Evaluate each of the following limits. If you use L’Hôpital’s Rule, indicate where it was used, and be certain its hypotheses are met before you apply it.
While L’Hôpital’s Rule can be applied in an entirely algebraic way, it is important to remember that the justification of the rule is graphical: the main idea is that the slopes of the tangent lines to and at determine the value of the limit of as .
It’s not the fact that and both approach zero that matters most, but rather the rate at which each approaches zero that determines the value of the limit. This is a good way to remember what L’Hôpital’s Rule says: if , the the limit of as is given by the ratio of the slopes of and at .
Figure2.8.3.Three graphs referenced in the questions of Activity 2.8.3.
Use the left-hand graph to determine the values of ,,, and . Then, evaluate .
Use the middle graph to find ,,, and . Then, determine the value of .
Assume that and are functions whose for which and Use the right-hand graph to compute ,,,. Explain why you cannot determine the exact value of without further information being provided, but that you can determine the sign of . In addition, state what the sign of the limit will be, with justification.
The concept of infinity, denoted , arises naturally in calculus, as it does in much of mathematics. It is important to note from the outset that is a concept, but not a number itself. Indeed, the notion of naturally invokes the idea of limits. Consider, for example, the function , whose graph is pictured in Figure 2.8.4.
We note that is not in the domain of , so we may naturally wonder what happens as . As , we observe that increases without bound. That is, we can make the value of as large as we like by taking closer and closer (but not equal) to 0, while keeping . This is a good way to think about what infinity represents: a quantity is tending to infinity if there is no single number that the quantity is always less than.
Recall that the statement , means that we can make as close to as we’d like by taking sufficiently close (but not equal) to . We now expand this notation and language to include the possibility that either or can be . For instance, for , we now write
In general, the notation means that we can make as large as we like by taking sufficiently close (but not equal) to , and the notation means that we can make as close to as we like by taking sufficiently large. This notation also applies to left- and right-hand limits, and to limits involving . For example, returning to Figure 2.8.4 and , we can say that
Limits involving infinity identify vertical and horizontal asymptotes of a function. If , then is a vertical asymptote of , while if , then is a horizontal asymptote of . Similar statements can be made using , and with left- and right-hand limits as or .
In precalculus classes, it is common to study the end behavior of certain families of functions, by which we mean the behavior of a function as and as . Here we briefly examine some familiar functions and note the values of several limits involving .
For the natural exponential function , we note that and . For the exponential decay function , these limits are reversed, with and . Turning to the natural logarithm function, we have and . While both and grow without bound as , the exponential function does so much more quickly than the logarithm function does. We’ll soon use limits to quantify what we mean by “quickly.”
the end behavior depends on the sign of and whether the highest power is even or odd. If is even and is positive, then and , as in the plot of in Figure 2.8.5. If instead is negative, then and . In the situation where is odd, then either and (which occurs when is positive, as in the graph of in Figure 2.8.5), or and (when is negative).
A function can fail to have a limit as . For example, consider the plot of the sine function at right in Figure 2.8.5. Because the function continues oscillating between and as , we say that does not exist.
Note that both as and as . Here we say that has indeterminate form . We can determine the value of this limit through a standard algebraic approach. Multiplying the numerator and denominator each by , we find that
since and as . This shows that the rational function has a horizontal asymptote at . A similar approach can be used to determine the limit of any rational function as .
Here, both and , but there is not an obvious algebraic approach that enables us to find the limit’s value. Fortunately, it turns out that L’Hôpital’s Rule extends to cases involving infinity.
(To be technically correct, we need to add the additional hypothesis that on an open interval that contains or in every neighborhood of infinity if is ; this is almost always met in practice.)
This updated limit is still indeterminate and of the form , but it is simpler since has replaced . Hence, we can apply L’Hôpital’s Rule again, and find that
Evaluate each of the following limits. If you use L’Hôpital’s Rule, indicate where it was used, and be certain its hypotheses are met before you apply it.
To evaluate the limit of a quotient of two functions that results in an indeterminate form of , in essence we are asking which function is growing faster without bound. We say that the function dominates the function as provided that
whereas dominates provided that . Finally, if the value of is finite and nonzero, we say that and grow at the same rate. For example, we saw that , so dominates , while , so and grow at the same rate.
Derivatives can be used to help us evaluate indeterminate limits of the form through L’Hôpital’s Rule, by replacing the functions in the numerator and denominator with their tangent line approximations. In particular, if and and are differentiable at , L’Hôpital’s Rule tells us that
.
When we write , this means that is increasing without bound. Thus, means that we can make as close to as we like by choosing to be sufficiently large. Similarly, , means that we can make as large as we like by choosing sufficiently close to .
A version of L’Hôpital’s Rule also helps us evaluate indeterminate limits of the form . If and are differentiable and both approach zero or both approach as (where is allowed to be ), then
A tank contains L of pure water. Brine that contains g of salt per liter of water is pumped into the tank at a rate of L/min. The concentration of salt after minutes can be shown to be given by:
Let and be differentiable functions about which the following information is known: ,,, and . Let a new function be given by the rule . On the same set of axes, sketch possible graphs of and near , and use the provided information to determine the value of
where ,, and are distinct, arbitrary constants. In addition, state all values of for which is not continuous. Sketch a possible graph of , clearly labeling the values of ,, and .
Consider the function , which is defined for all . Observe that is indeterminate due to its form of . (Think about how we know that for all , while for all , but that neither rule can apply to .)