How do you prove only a Taylor series converges to a function without knowing the original function?

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose you only had the Taylor series for $e^x$ but you didn't know what function it was derived from, $$ sum_k=0^ infty fracx^kk!.$$
How do you prove this series converges to $e^x$ without relying on the preconceived process of taking derivatives of $ e^x$?
proof-writing taylor-expansion
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose you only had the Taylor series for $e^x$ but you didn't know what function it was derived from, $$ sum_k=0^ infty fracx^kk!.$$
How do you prove this series converges to $e^x$ without relying on the preconceived process of taking derivatives of $ e^x$?
proof-writing taylor-expansion
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose you only had the Taylor series for $e^x$ but you didn't know what function it was derived from, $$ sum_k=0^ infty fracx^kk!.$$
How do you prove this series converges to $e^x$ without relying on the preconceived process of taking derivatives of $ e^x$?
proof-writing taylor-expansion
Suppose you only had the Taylor series for $e^x$ but you didn't know what function it was derived from, $$ sum_k=0^ infty fracx^kk!.$$
How do you prove this series converges to $e^x$ without relying on the preconceived process of taking derivatives of $ e^x$?
proof-writing taylor-expansion
asked Aug 23 at 3:33
Vane Voe
1
1
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52
add a comment |Â
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I believe knowing the taylor expansions of $e^x$ and other functions such as $sin(x)$ an $cos(x)$ are usually used when trying to identify a taylor series as reference.
But in reference to this particular one I think the simplest way to show that $$sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = e^x$$ is by showing that the derivative of the sum is the original, like so
$$fracddxsum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = sum^infty_k=1fracx^k-1(k-1)! = sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk!$$
And so then it must be $Ce^x$ for some $C$, from here it could be shown that $C=1$ by showing that no fractional term can be simplified further.
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
It depends on what you mean by $e^x$ in the first place (some people define $e^x$ by as its Taylor series, and prove its properties later. I dislike this approach).
If you define $e$ as $lim_nto infty left( 1 + frac1nright)^n$ and the exponential through some continuity argument, then you can show that any function with the property
$$ f(x+y) = f(x) f(y) $$ must be an exponential function. To find the base you need only find $f(1)$, or $sum frac1k!$ in this case. Then, show this is equal to the limit definition of $e$.
On the other hand, I like to define $e^x$ as the fixed point of the derivative, that is
$$fracddx e^x = e^x.$$ In fact, $e^x$ is the unique function which satisfies this (well, technically $c e^x$ for some constant $c$, but again evaluate at $1$ and you get $ce$ so). If you know(/prove) this, then all you need to do is differentiate the power series and notice it's the same function. This is more complicated than it might seem, you aren't allowed to differentiate power series term by term:
$$ fracddx sum f_k(x) = sum fracddx f_k(x) $$ generally only works for a finite sum. Fortunately, this series is uniformly convergent everywhere and for such series you can differentiate term by term (actually there is another sublety here, the series must converge somewhere, but this series rather obviously converges when $x$ is $0$).
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Let us define $e^x$ to be the unique solution to $f' = f$ with $f(0)=1.$ Then it's easy to show that $sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n = e^x$:
Let $f(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n.$ Then,
$$
f'(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= text first term vanishes so we can start at $n=1$ \
= sum_n=1^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= sum_n=1^infty frac1(n-1)! x^n-1
= text set $m=n-1$
= sum_m=0^infty frac1m! x^m = f(x)
$$
Also,
$$f(0) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! 0^n = text$0^0 = 1$ and $0^n=0$ when $n>0$ = frac10! = 1.$$
Thus $f'=f$ and $f(0) = 1$ so $f(x) = e^x.$
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I believe knowing the taylor expansions of $e^x$ and other functions such as $sin(x)$ an $cos(x)$ are usually used when trying to identify a taylor series as reference.
But in reference to this particular one I think the simplest way to show that $$sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = e^x$$ is by showing that the derivative of the sum is the original, like so
$$fracddxsum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = sum^infty_k=1fracx^k-1(k-1)! = sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk!$$
And so then it must be $Ce^x$ for some $C$, from here it could be shown that $C=1$ by showing that no fractional term can be simplified further.
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I believe knowing the taylor expansions of $e^x$ and other functions such as $sin(x)$ an $cos(x)$ are usually used when trying to identify a taylor series as reference.
But in reference to this particular one I think the simplest way to show that $$sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = e^x$$ is by showing that the derivative of the sum is the original, like so
$$fracddxsum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = sum^infty_k=1fracx^k-1(k-1)! = sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk!$$
And so then it must be $Ce^x$ for some $C$, from here it could be shown that $C=1$ by showing that no fractional term can be simplified further.
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I believe knowing the taylor expansions of $e^x$ and other functions such as $sin(x)$ an $cos(x)$ are usually used when trying to identify a taylor series as reference.
But in reference to this particular one I think the simplest way to show that $$sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = e^x$$ is by showing that the derivative of the sum is the original, like so
$$fracddxsum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = sum^infty_k=1fracx^k-1(k-1)! = sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk!$$
And so then it must be $Ce^x$ for some $C$, from here it could be shown that $C=1$ by showing that no fractional term can be simplified further.
I believe knowing the taylor expansions of $e^x$ and other functions such as $sin(x)$ an $cos(x)$ are usually used when trying to identify a taylor series as reference.
But in reference to this particular one I think the simplest way to show that $$sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = e^x$$ is by showing that the derivative of the sum is the original, like so
$$fracddxsum^infty_k=0fracx^kk! = sum^infty_k=1fracx^k-1(k-1)! = sum^infty_k=0fracx^kk!$$
And so then it must be $Ce^x$ for some $C$, from here it could be shown that $C=1$ by showing that no fractional term can be simplified further.
edited Aug 23 at 3:48
answered Aug 23 at 3:41
Ryski
314
314
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
add a comment |Â
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
I guess that's a good way to think about it, but I was for a more general technique that might be applicable to any series. Is there some way to use induction?
â Vane Voe
Aug 23 at 5:29
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
â Ryski
Aug 24 at 6:17
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
It depends on what you mean by $e^x$ in the first place (some people define $e^x$ by as its Taylor series, and prove its properties later. I dislike this approach).
If you define $e$ as $lim_nto infty left( 1 + frac1nright)^n$ and the exponential through some continuity argument, then you can show that any function with the property
$$ f(x+y) = f(x) f(y) $$ must be an exponential function. To find the base you need only find $f(1)$, or $sum frac1k!$ in this case. Then, show this is equal to the limit definition of $e$.
On the other hand, I like to define $e^x$ as the fixed point of the derivative, that is
$$fracddx e^x = e^x.$$ In fact, $e^x$ is the unique function which satisfies this (well, technically $c e^x$ for some constant $c$, but again evaluate at $1$ and you get $ce$ so). If you know(/prove) this, then all you need to do is differentiate the power series and notice it's the same function. This is more complicated than it might seem, you aren't allowed to differentiate power series term by term:
$$ fracddx sum f_k(x) = sum fracddx f_k(x) $$ generally only works for a finite sum. Fortunately, this series is uniformly convergent everywhere and for such series you can differentiate term by term (actually there is another sublety here, the series must converge somewhere, but this series rather obviously converges when $x$ is $0$).
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
It depends on what you mean by $e^x$ in the first place (some people define $e^x$ by as its Taylor series, and prove its properties later. I dislike this approach).
If you define $e$ as $lim_nto infty left( 1 + frac1nright)^n$ and the exponential through some continuity argument, then you can show that any function with the property
$$ f(x+y) = f(x) f(y) $$ must be an exponential function. To find the base you need only find $f(1)$, or $sum frac1k!$ in this case. Then, show this is equal to the limit definition of $e$.
On the other hand, I like to define $e^x$ as the fixed point of the derivative, that is
$$fracddx e^x = e^x.$$ In fact, $e^x$ is the unique function which satisfies this (well, technically $c e^x$ for some constant $c$, but again evaluate at $1$ and you get $ce$ so). If you know(/prove) this, then all you need to do is differentiate the power series and notice it's the same function. This is more complicated than it might seem, you aren't allowed to differentiate power series term by term:
$$ fracddx sum f_k(x) = sum fracddx f_k(x) $$ generally only works for a finite sum. Fortunately, this series is uniformly convergent everywhere and for such series you can differentiate term by term (actually there is another sublety here, the series must converge somewhere, but this series rather obviously converges when $x$ is $0$).
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
It depends on what you mean by $e^x$ in the first place (some people define $e^x$ by as its Taylor series, and prove its properties later. I dislike this approach).
If you define $e$ as $lim_nto infty left( 1 + frac1nright)^n$ and the exponential through some continuity argument, then you can show that any function with the property
$$ f(x+y) = f(x) f(y) $$ must be an exponential function. To find the base you need only find $f(1)$, or $sum frac1k!$ in this case. Then, show this is equal to the limit definition of $e$.
On the other hand, I like to define $e^x$ as the fixed point of the derivative, that is
$$fracddx e^x = e^x.$$ In fact, $e^x$ is the unique function which satisfies this (well, technically $c e^x$ for some constant $c$, but again evaluate at $1$ and you get $ce$ so). If you know(/prove) this, then all you need to do is differentiate the power series and notice it's the same function. This is more complicated than it might seem, you aren't allowed to differentiate power series term by term:
$$ fracddx sum f_k(x) = sum fracddx f_k(x) $$ generally only works for a finite sum. Fortunately, this series is uniformly convergent everywhere and for such series you can differentiate term by term (actually there is another sublety here, the series must converge somewhere, but this series rather obviously converges when $x$ is $0$).
It depends on what you mean by $e^x$ in the first place (some people define $e^x$ by as its Taylor series, and prove its properties later. I dislike this approach).
If you define $e$ as $lim_nto infty left( 1 + frac1nright)^n$ and the exponential through some continuity argument, then you can show that any function with the property
$$ f(x+y) = f(x) f(y) $$ must be an exponential function. To find the base you need only find $f(1)$, or $sum frac1k!$ in this case. Then, show this is equal to the limit definition of $e$.
On the other hand, I like to define $e^x$ as the fixed point of the derivative, that is
$$fracddx e^x = e^x.$$ In fact, $e^x$ is the unique function which satisfies this (well, technically $c e^x$ for some constant $c$, but again evaluate at $1$ and you get $ce$ so). If you know(/prove) this, then all you need to do is differentiate the power series and notice it's the same function. This is more complicated than it might seem, you aren't allowed to differentiate power series term by term:
$$ fracddx sum f_k(x) = sum fracddx f_k(x) $$ generally only works for a finite sum. Fortunately, this series is uniformly convergent everywhere and for such series you can differentiate term by term (actually there is another sublety here, the series must converge somewhere, but this series rather obviously converges when $x$ is $0$).
answered Aug 23 at 3:55
Ryan
189114
189114
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
add a comment |Â
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (whatâÂÂs the right word?) unseen workings.
â Chase Ryan Taylor
Aug 23 at 5:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Let us define $e^x$ to be the unique solution to $f' = f$ with $f(0)=1.$ Then it's easy to show that $sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n = e^x$:
Let $f(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n.$ Then,
$$
f'(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= text first term vanishes so we can start at $n=1$ \
= sum_n=1^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= sum_n=1^infty frac1(n-1)! x^n-1
= text set $m=n-1$
= sum_m=0^infty frac1m! x^m = f(x)
$$
Also,
$$f(0) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! 0^n = text$0^0 = 1$ and $0^n=0$ when $n>0$ = frac10! = 1.$$
Thus $f'=f$ and $f(0) = 1$ so $f(x) = e^x.$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Let us define $e^x$ to be the unique solution to $f' = f$ with $f(0)=1.$ Then it's easy to show that $sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n = e^x$:
Let $f(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n.$ Then,
$$
f'(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= text first term vanishes so we can start at $n=1$ \
= sum_n=1^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= sum_n=1^infty frac1(n-1)! x^n-1
= text set $m=n-1$
= sum_m=0^infty frac1m! x^m = f(x)
$$
Also,
$$f(0) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! 0^n = text$0^0 = 1$ and $0^n=0$ when $n>0$ = frac10! = 1.$$
Thus $f'=f$ and $f(0) = 1$ so $f(x) = e^x.$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Let us define $e^x$ to be the unique solution to $f' = f$ with $f(0)=1.$ Then it's easy to show that $sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n = e^x$:
Let $f(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n.$ Then,
$$
f'(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= text first term vanishes so we can start at $n=1$ \
= sum_n=1^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= sum_n=1^infty frac1(n-1)! x^n-1
= text set $m=n-1$
= sum_m=0^infty frac1m! x^m = f(x)
$$
Also,
$$f(0) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! 0^n = text$0^0 = 1$ and $0^n=0$ when $n>0$ = frac10! = 1.$$
Thus $f'=f$ and $f(0) = 1$ so $f(x) = e^x.$
Let us define $e^x$ to be the unique solution to $f' = f$ with $f(0)=1.$ Then it's easy to show that $sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n = e^x$:
Let $f(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! x^n.$ Then,
$$
f'(x) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= text first term vanishes so we can start at $n=1$ \
= sum_n=1^infty frac1n! n x^n-1
= sum_n=1^infty frac1(n-1)! x^n-1
= text set $m=n-1$
= sum_m=0^infty frac1m! x^m = f(x)
$$
Also,
$$f(0) = sum_n=0^infty frac1n! 0^n = text$0^0 = 1$ and $0^n=0$ when $n>0$ = frac10! = 1.$$
Thus $f'=f$ and $f(0) = 1$ so $f(x) = e^x.$
answered Aug 23 at 8:10
md2perpe
6,36811022
6,36811022
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2891672%2fhow-do-you-prove-only-a-taylor-series-converges-to-a-function-without-knowing-th%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
How would you define $e^x$?
â copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52