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

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash 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$?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • How would you define $e^x$?
    – copper.hat
    Aug 23 at 3:52














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$?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • How would you define $e^x$?
    – copper.hat
    Aug 23 at 3:52












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$?







share|cite|improve this question












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$?









share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 23 at 3:33









Vane Voe

1




1











  • How would you define $e^x$?
    – copper.hat
    Aug 23 at 3:52
















  • How would you define $e^x$?
    – copper.hat
    Aug 23 at 3:52















How would you define $e^x$?
– copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52




How would you define $e^x$?
– copper.hat
Aug 23 at 3:52










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.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • 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?
    – Vane Voe
    Aug 23 at 5:29











  • There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
    – Ryski
    Aug 24 at 6:17

















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 $0$).






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
    – Chase Ryan Taylor
    Aug 23 at 5:34

















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 $f(x) = e^x.$






share|cite|improve this answer




















    Your Answer




    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    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






























    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • 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?
      – Vane Voe
      Aug 23 at 5:29











    • There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
      – Ryski
      Aug 24 at 6:17














    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • 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?
      – Vane Voe
      Aug 23 at 5:29











    • There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
      – Ryski
      Aug 24 at 6:17












    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    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.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    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?
      – Vane Voe
      Aug 23 at 5:29











    • There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
      – 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?
      – Vane Voe
      Aug 23 at 5:29











    • There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
      – 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?
    – 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?
    – Vane Voe
    Aug 23 at 5:29













    There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
    – Ryski
    Aug 24 at 6:17




    There is an epsilon delta proof if memory serves, I can go digging if you want
    – Ryski
    Aug 24 at 6:17










    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 $0$).






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
      – Chase Ryan Taylor
      Aug 23 at 5:34














    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 $0$).






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • It really fascinates me that something so seemingly simple as the natural exponential can have such a complicated (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
      – Chase Ryan Taylor
      Aug 23 at 5:34












    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 $0$).






    share|cite|improve this answer












    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 $0$).







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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 (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
      – 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 (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
      – 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 (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
    – 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 (what’s the right word?) unseen workings.
    – Chase Ryan Taylor
    Aug 23 at 5:34










    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 $f(x) = e^x.$






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      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 $f(x) = e^x.$






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        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 $f(x) = e^x.$






        share|cite|improve this answer












        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 $f(x) = e^x.$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Aug 23 at 8:10









        md2perpe

        6,36811022




        6,36811022



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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