Results 1 to 8 of 8

Math Help - Taylor's Theorem problem 1

  1. #1
    Senior Member Pinkk's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    From
    Uptown Manhattan, NY, USA
    Posts
    419

    Taylor's Theorem problem 1

    Let g(x) = e^{\frac{-1}{x^{2}}} for x \ne 0 and g(0) = 0.

    Show that g^{n}(0) = 0 for all n\ge 0 and show that the Taylor series for g about 0 agrees with g only at x=0.

    So yeah, I am completely lost now in my real analysis class and really don't understand much of anything going on now. It says to use induction to prove that there exist polynomials p_{kn}, 1\le k \le n so that g^{(n)}(x) = \sum_{k=1}^{n}f^{(k)}(x^{2})p_{kn}(x) for x\in \mathbb{R}, n\ge 1, where f(x)=e^{\frac{-1}{x}}. Don't really now where to begin, thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    422
    Fa di Bruno's formula - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    (to the composition g(x) = f(x^2))
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Senior Member Pinkk's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    From
    Uptown Manhattan, NY, USA
    Posts
    419
    Sorry, I don't understand. We have not learned anything that advanced yet. I don't understand what Bell polynomials are and how that relates to getting a polynomial of one variable. I don't understand how two superscripts k,n come into play or what it means to have a polynomial called p_{kn}.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by maddas View Post
    Fa di Bruno's formula - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    (to the composition g(x) = f(x^2))
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkk View Post
    Sorry, I don't understand. We have not learned anything that advanced yet. I don't understand what Bell polynomials are and how that relates to getting a polynomial of one variable. I don't understand how two superscripts k,n come into play or what it means to have a polynomial called p_{kn}.
    Faa di Bruno's formula is absolute overkill for this, I have only tangentially even heard of it by browsing MathWorld.com. Isn't only used in Umbral Calculus pretty much?

    So, which part are you having trouble with?

    So, we can prove by induction that g^{(n)}(0)=0. To do this, we prove as was suggested that g^{(n)}(x)=p\left(\tfrac{1}{x}\right)e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}},\text{ }x\ne 0.

    To, see this we first note that g^{(1)}(x)=\frac{2}{x^3}e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}} which clearly satisfies the conditions.

    Next, we suppose that g^{(n)}(x)=p\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}} and so g^{(n+1)}(x)=\frac{-1}{x^2}p'\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}}+\frac{2}{x^3}p\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)e^{  \frac{-1}{x^2}}, but a little factoring shows this is just a polynomial in \frac{1}{x} times e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}}
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Senior Member Pinkk's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    From
    Uptown Manhattan, NY, USA
    Posts
    419
    I had an idea like that but I guess I got too caught up with the suggested hint because it says to consider that g(x)=f(x^{2}) where f(x) = e^{-1/x} and then show that g^{(n)} is actually a series of products, where each product is f^{(k)}(x^{2})p_{kn}. That notation of p_{kn} completely through me off, never seen that before and not sure where to begin, but if it can be done more simply as a single polynomial of 1/x times e^{-1/x^{2}}, I much rather do that.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkk View Post
    I had an idea like that but I guess I got too caught up with the suggested hint because it says to consider that g(x)=f(x^{2}) where f(x) = e^{-1/x} and then show that g^{(n)} is actually a series of products, where the each product is f^{(k)}(x^{2})p_{kn}. That notation of p_{kn} completely through me off, never seen that before and not sure where to begin, but if it can be done more simply as a single polynomial of 1/x times e^{-1/x^{2}}, I much rather do that.
    Yeah, of course. Because you should know that \lim_{x\to 0}p\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)e^{\frac{-1}{x^2}}=\lim_{z\to\infty}\frac{p(z)}{e^z}=0=f(0)
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Senior Member Pinkk's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    From
    Uptown Manhattan, NY, USA
    Posts
    419
    Well, technically it should be \frac{p(z)}{e^{z^{2}}} but that really doesn't make a difference since e^{z^{2}} will still dominate any polynomial as z tends to infinity, correct?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkk View Post
    Well, technically it should be \frac{p(z)}{e^{z^{2}}} but that really doesn't make a difference since [tex]e^{z^{2}} will still dominate any polynomial as z tends to infinity, correct?
    Mhmm.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Taylor's Theorem
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 10th 2011, 07:45 PM
  2. Taylor's Theorem problem 2
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 1st 2010, 10:48 PM
  3. Problem with Taylor's Theorem
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 10th 2007, 12:07 AM
  4. Taylor's theorem
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 22nd 2007, 03:28 PM
  5. Problem regarding Taylor's Theorem
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 22nd 2007, 01:28 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum