Art of Problem Solving
AoPS Online
Math texts, online classes, and more
for students in grades 5-12.
Visit AoPS Online ‚
Books for Grades 5-12 Online Courses
Beast Academy
Engaging math books and online learning
for students ages 6-13.
Visit Beast Academy ‚
Books for Ages 6-13 Beast Academy Online
AoPS Academy
Small live classes for advanced math
and language arts learners in grades 2-12.
Visit AoPS Academy ‚
Find a Physical Campus Visit the Virtual Campus

Difference between revisions of "Euler's number"

m
m (proofreading)
Line 13: Line 13:
  
  
−
Now look what has happened.  Something special has almost happened.  We found the derivative of <math>b^x</math>, and what we got was ''almost'' <math>b^x</math>.  In other words, the derivative of this function is ''almost'' the same function that we started with.  However, there is that annoying and kind of messy limit on the right that is messing things up.
+
Now, look what has happened.  Something special has almost happened.  We found the derivative of <math>b^x</math>, and what we got was ''almost'' <math>b^x</math>.  In other words, the derivative of this function is ''almost'' the same function that we started with.  However, there is that annoying and kind of messy limit on the right that is messing things up.
  
  
−
It seems like it would be at least cool, if not downright useful, to have a function whose derivative is equal to itself.  (In fact, it turns out that such a function is very useful indeed, for example in finding solutions to certain [[differential equation]]s.)  So let's ask this question:  Is it possible to cleverly pick a special value of <math>b</math> in order to make that annoying limit on the right turn out to be equal to <math>1</math>?  If this were possible, then for that special value of <math>b</math>, it would in fact be true that the derivative of <math>b^x</math> is just <math>b^x</math>, exactly the same function we started with.
+
It seems like it would be at least cool, if not downright useful, to have a function whose derivative is equal to itself.  (In fact, it turns out that such a function is very useful indeed, for example, in finding solutions to certain [[differential equation]]s.)  So, let's ask this question:  Is it possible to cleverly pick a special value of <math>b</math> in order to make that annoying limit on the right turn out to be equal to <math>1</math>?  If this were possible, then for that special value of <math>b</math>, it would in fact be true that the derivative of <math>b^x</math> is just <math>b^x</math>, exactly the same function we started with.
  
  
Line 22: Line 22:
  
  
−
So, how do we choose <math>b</math> so that <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{b^{\Delta x} - 1}{\Delta x} = 1</math>?  Could we pick <math>b</math> in some clever way to make this expression simplify?  As a first rough idea, imagine what would happen to the expression <math>\frac{b^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x}</math> if <math>b</math> were equal to <math>(1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x} }</math>.  Everything cancels out nicely, and we are left with just <math>1</math>.  This suggests that we should select <math>b</math> to be <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} (1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x}}</math>.  So here we have our definition of <math>e</math>.  This limit is approximately <math>2.718</math>.
+
So, how do we choose <math>b</math> so that <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{b^{\Delta x} - 1}{\Delta x} = 1</math>?  Could we pick <math>b</math> in some clever way to make this expression simplify?  As a first rough idea, imagine what would happen to the expression <math>\frac{b^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x}</math> if <math>b</math> were equal to <math>(1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x} }</math>.  Everything cancels out nicely, and we are left with just <math>1</math>.  This suggests that we should select <math>b</math> to be <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} (1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x}}</math>.  Here we have our definition of <math>e</math>.  This limit is approximately <math>2.718</math>.
  
  
−
To make this rigorous, it should be possible to prove that this limit actually exists.  And once we define <math>e</math> to be this limit, it should be possible to prove that <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{e^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x} = 1</math>.
+
To make this rigorous, it should be possible to prove that this limit actually exists.  Once we define <math>e</math> to be this limit, it should be possible to prove that <math>\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{e^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x} = 1</math>.
  
  

Revision as of 13:45, 27 June 2006

e is a mathematical constant that shows up in a wide variety of places. It has been shown to be both irrational and transcendental. Numerically, it is approximately equal to 2.71828.

e and calculus

e is defined as the following limit: $e=\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}{(1+\frac1n)}^n$. In calculus, the fact that $e^x = \sum{\frac{x^n}{n!}}$ is used often, based on the above definition and the Binomial Theorem.

Where $e$ comes from

Suppose $b$ is a positive real number, and $f(x) = b^x$ for all real numbers $x$. Let's try to figure out what $f'(x)$ is.


$f'(x) = \lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{f(x+\Delta x)-f(x)}{\Delta x} = \lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{b^{x+\Delta x} - b^x}{\Delta x} = \lim_{\Delta x \to 0} b^x \left( \frac {b^{\Delta x} - 1}{\Delta x}\right) = b^x \left(\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{b^{\Delta x} - 1}{\Delta x}\right)$.


Now, look what has happened. Something special has almost happened. We found the derivative of $b^x$, and what we got was almost $b^x$. In other words, the derivative of this function is almost the same function that we started with. However, there is that annoying and kind of messy limit on the right that is messing things up.


It seems like it would be at least cool, if not downright useful, to have a function whose derivative is equal to itself. (In fact, it turns out that such a function is very useful indeed, for example, in finding solutions to certain differential equations.) So, let's ask this question: Is it possible to cleverly pick a special value of $b$ in order to make that annoying limit on the right turn out to be equal to $1$? If this were possible, then for that special value of $b$, it would in fact be true that the derivative of $b^x$ is just $b^x$, exactly the same function we started with.


Well, the fact is that there is a special value of $b$ which accomplishes this goal. It is approximately $2.718$, and it is called $e$. ("$e$" stands for exponential and not Euler, despite the fact that Euler was one of the first mathematicians to use it and the one to name it. $e$ is sometimes (perhaps incorrectly) called "Euler's number." However, Napier came close to discovering $e$ (or, rather, $1/e$) before Euler did.)


So, how do we choose $b$ so that $\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{b^{\Delta x} - 1}{\Delta x} = 1$? Could we pick $b$ in some clever way to make this expression simplify? As a first rough idea, imagine what would happen to the expression $\frac{b^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x}$ if $b$ were equal to $(1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x} }$. Everything cancels out nicely, and we are left with just $1$. This suggests that we should select $b$ to be $\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} (1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x}}$. Here we have our definition of $e$. This limit is approximately $2.718$.


To make this rigorous, it should be possible to prove that this limit actually exists. Once we define $e$ to be this limit, it should be possible to prove that $\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} \frac{e^{\Delta x}-1}{\Delta x} = 1$.


(This definition of $e$ is equivalent to the one given at the beginning of this article. Just let $M = \frac{1}{\Delta x}$. Then $\lim_{\Delta x \to 0} (1+\Delta x)^{\frac{1}{\Delta x}} = \lim_{M \to \infty} \left(1 + \frac{1}{M}\right)^M$.)

See also

Retrieved from "https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Euler%27s_number&oldid=4999"