Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 11 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

Use l'Hopital's Rule to evaluate lim(x−>1)(x2−2x+1)^(x−1) and identify the indeterminate form

OpenStudy (anonymous):

my big confusion is why ln(0)=positive infinity

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ln(x->0)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ln(x->0+)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

That's not the kind of thing that you solve with l'Hospital's rule. That rule can only be applied to fractions.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

But you can solve it with L'hopitals if you take the ln of the inside part

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well the ln of the thing you are finding the limit of

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Then you get something that you can rewrite, and then do l'hopitals with

OpenStudy (anonymous):

That's how 0^0 is solved, yeah. I don't think it's called l'Hospital's rule though. To my knowledge at least.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

You do apply l'hopitals in the problem. That particular step is not l'hopitals though

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ANYWAYS, why is the limit of ln(x) as x->0+ positive infinity

OpenStudy (zarkon):

it's not

OpenStudy (anonymous):

According to these solutions I found it is

OpenStudy (zarkon):

\[\lim_{x\to 0^{+}}\ln(x)=-\infty\]

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Yes

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Why

OpenStudy (zarkon):

don't believe everything you read.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Wait no

OpenStudy (zarkon):

graph ln(x)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I know what ln(x) looks like

OpenStudy (zarkon):

|dw:1425775452772:dw|

OpenStudy (anonymous):

If you think about the definition of a cusp, one limit goes to infinity, and one goes to negative infinity, even though it does look like both go to one infinity

OpenStudy (zarkon):

what are you talking about

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Scroll down to the part where it defines a cusp

OpenStudy (zarkon):

there are no cusps for ln(x)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I know that, but I think that it is the exact same case. Since one of the cusp's limits goes to positive infinity, I think that is the same thing for ln(x), but idk why it is positive

OpenStudy (anonymous):

They say that it is positive infinity over positive infinity

OpenStudy (zarkon):

and what does that have to do with just ln(x)

OpenStudy (zarkon):

those are more complicated functions

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ln(x) is like half of a cusp

OpenStudy (zarkon):

it is not

OpenStudy (anonymous):

And I guess it is the half that goes to positive infinity

OpenStudy (anonymous):

In terms of limits it is

OpenStudy (zarkon):

cusps have a definite stopping point |dw:1425775816174:dw| the ln(x) does not

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!