How to prove $dfrac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x$? [duplicate]












3












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • Proving that $limlimits_{x to 0}frac{e^x-1}{x} = 1$

    5 answers




I have a problem : How to prove
$$dfrac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x;?$$



My answer is
begin{eqnarray}
dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x+h}-e^x}{h}\
&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x}e^h-e^x}{h}\
&=&e^{x}limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}\
end{eqnarray}

But I don't know to find $limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}$. So how to find it?



Note: I cannot use L'Hospital rule.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by Jam, amWhy calculus
Users with the  calculus badge can single-handedly close calculus questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Dec 16 '18 at 12:20


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.











  • 3




    $begingroup$
    What definition of e^x are you using here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:10










  • $begingroup$
    @ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
    $endgroup$
    – badjohn
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:28










  • $begingroup$
    It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
    $endgroup$
    – KM101
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:31












  • $begingroup$
    @ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:33
















3












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • Proving that $limlimits_{x to 0}frac{e^x-1}{x} = 1$

    5 answers




I have a problem : How to prove
$$dfrac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x;?$$



My answer is
begin{eqnarray}
dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x+h}-e^x}{h}\
&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x}e^h-e^x}{h}\
&=&e^{x}limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}\
end{eqnarray}

But I don't know to find $limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}$. So how to find it?



Note: I cannot use L'Hospital rule.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by Jam, amWhy calculus
Users with the  calculus badge can single-handedly close calculus questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Dec 16 '18 at 12:20


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.











  • 3




    $begingroup$
    What definition of e^x are you using here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:10










  • $begingroup$
    @ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
    $endgroup$
    – badjohn
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:28










  • $begingroup$
    It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
    $endgroup$
    – KM101
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:31












  • $begingroup$
    @ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:33














3












3








3





$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • Proving that $limlimits_{x to 0}frac{e^x-1}{x} = 1$

    5 answers




I have a problem : How to prove
$$dfrac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x;?$$



My answer is
begin{eqnarray}
dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x+h}-e^x}{h}\
&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x}e^h-e^x}{h}\
&=&e^{x}limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}\
end{eqnarray}

But I don't know to find $limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}$. So how to find it?



Note: I cannot use L'Hospital rule.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





This question already has an answer here:




  • Proving that $limlimits_{x to 0}frac{e^x-1}{x} = 1$

    5 answers




I have a problem : How to prove
$$dfrac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x;?$$



My answer is
begin{eqnarray}
dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x+h}-e^x}{h}\
&=&limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^{x}e^h-e^x}{h}\
&=&e^{x}limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}\
end{eqnarray}

But I don't know to find $limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}$. So how to find it?



Note: I cannot use L'Hospital rule.





This question already has an answer here:




  • Proving that $limlimits_{x to 0}frac{e^x-1}{x} = 1$

    5 answers








calculus derivatives exponential-function limits-without-lhopital






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 16 '18 at 12:18









Jam

4,95021431




4,95021431










asked Dec 16 '18 at 12:04









Ongky Denny WijayaOngky Denny Wijaya

1296




1296




marked as duplicate by Jam, amWhy calculus
Users with the  calculus badge can single-handedly close calculus questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Dec 16 '18 at 12:20


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






marked as duplicate by Jam, amWhy calculus
Users with the  calculus badge can single-handedly close calculus questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Dec 16 '18 at 12:20


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.










  • 3




    $begingroup$
    What definition of e^x are you using here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:10










  • $begingroup$
    @ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
    $endgroup$
    – badjohn
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:28










  • $begingroup$
    It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
    $endgroup$
    – KM101
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:31












  • $begingroup$
    @ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:33














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    What definition of e^x are you using here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:10










  • $begingroup$
    @ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
    $endgroup$
    – badjohn
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:28










  • $begingroup$
    It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
    $endgroup$
    – KM101
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:31












  • $begingroup$
    @ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:33








3




3




$begingroup$
What definition of e^x are you using here?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 16 '18 at 12:10




$begingroup$
What definition of e^x are you using here?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 16 '18 at 12:10












$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
$endgroup$
– Ongky Denny Wijaya
Dec 16 '18 at 12:25




$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft e^x = exponential
$endgroup$
– Ongky Denny Wijaya
Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












$begingroup$
I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
Dec 16 '18 at 12:28




$begingroup$
I don't think that Smiley needed to know that but there are multiple possible definitions of the function and no official one. One of those possible definitions is that it is the solution of that differential equation and, with that, there would be nothing to prove. A popular one is the power series which would also make this easy.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
Dec 16 '18 at 12:28












$begingroup$
It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
$endgroup$
– KM101
Dec 16 '18 at 12:31






$begingroup$
It depends on your definition of $e$ (or $e^x$). If you have $e = lim_limits{h to infty}big(1+frac{1}{h}big)^h = lim_limits{h to 0}(1+h)^{frac{1}{h}}$, then $lim_limits{h to 0} e^h = 1+h$, and the limit becomes $1$.
$endgroup$
– KM101
Dec 16 '18 at 12:31














$begingroup$
@ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
$endgroup$
– Ongky Denny Wijaya
Dec 16 '18 at 12:33




$begingroup$
@ Jam, using the power series of $e^x$
$endgroup$
– Ongky Denny Wijaya
Dec 16 '18 at 12:33










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Personally, the simplest and best way to prove this identity is not from the definition of derivative, but to use the power series for $e^x$:



$$e^x = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{x^k}{k!} = 1 + x + frac{x^2}{2} + frac{x^3}{2 cdot 3} + ...$$



Since



$$frac{d}{dx} left( f(x) + g(x) right) = frac{d}{dx} f(x) + frac{d}{dx} g(x)$$



performing the derivative becomes quite easy and should easily show the identity.



The power series will also prove useful if going from the definition of derivative as a limit as well, if you insist on using that. Personally, the method above I find much more elegant and intuitive but that's a matter of opinion.





Note that interchanging the operations of derivatives and infinite summation does not always hold, i.e.



$$frac{d}{dx} sum_{k=0}^infty f(k) = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{d}{dx} f(k)$$



need not always hold. (While the derivative operation does "distribute" per the summation rule above, that is for finite summation, and need not hold true when we have infinite summation. That it does is a consequence of other facts.)



My own personal understanding of the underlying reason is lacking, so I'm mostly deferring to Riley's comments on my answer in the matter. For this to be applicable in general, the sequence of derivatives for $f(k)$ must converge uniformly - which, in this case, happens to be true for the polynomials $f(k) = x^k/k!$.



Edit



The proof that a power series with uniform convergence may be differentiated termwise within its radius of convergence is given as theorem 2 on this page and on this page. The proof that $e^x$ has a radius convergence of $infty$ (and hence is termwise differentiable everywhere) is given on this page.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:18










  • $begingroup$
    I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:20






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:23










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 13:11



















2












$begingroup$

The key fact is that



$$lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1nright)^n to e implies lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e$$



indeed for any $xin (n,n+1)$



$$left(1+frac1{n+1}right)^n le left(1+frac1xright)^x le left(1+frac1{n}right)^{n+1} $$



then take the limit and use squeeze theorem.



Then



$$lim_{xto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e implies frac{log left(1+frac1xright)}{frac1x}to 1 implies frac{log (1+t)}{t}to 1 , tto 0$$



then by $h=log (1+t)to 0, t to 0$



$$limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}=limlimits_{tto 0}dfrac{t}{log (1+t)}=1$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:19












  • $begingroup$
    @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












  • $begingroup$
    @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:34










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36










  • $begingroup$
    @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:43



















0












$begingroup$

begin{eqnarray}
e^x&=&sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&dfrac{d}{dx}sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
&=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{d}{dx}dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
&=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{kx^{k-1}}{k!}\
&=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{x^{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\
&=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^{k}}{k!}\
&=&e^x
end{eqnarray}






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    Personally, the simplest and best way to prove this identity is not from the definition of derivative, but to use the power series for $e^x$:



    $$e^x = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{x^k}{k!} = 1 + x + frac{x^2}{2} + frac{x^3}{2 cdot 3} + ...$$



    Since



    $$frac{d}{dx} left( f(x) + g(x) right) = frac{d}{dx} f(x) + frac{d}{dx} g(x)$$



    performing the derivative becomes quite easy and should easily show the identity.



    The power series will also prove useful if going from the definition of derivative as a limit as well, if you insist on using that. Personally, the method above I find much more elegant and intuitive but that's a matter of opinion.





    Note that interchanging the operations of derivatives and infinite summation does not always hold, i.e.



    $$frac{d}{dx} sum_{k=0}^infty f(k) = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{d}{dx} f(k)$$



    need not always hold. (While the derivative operation does "distribute" per the summation rule above, that is for finite summation, and need not hold true when we have infinite summation. That it does is a consequence of other facts.)



    My own personal understanding of the underlying reason is lacking, so I'm mostly deferring to Riley's comments on my answer in the matter. For this to be applicable in general, the sequence of derivatives for $f(k)$ must converge uniformly - which, in this case, happens to be true for the polynomials $f(k) = x^k/k!$.



    Edit



    The proof that a power series with uniform convergence may be differentiated termwise within its radius of convergence is given as theorem 2 on this page and on this page. The proof that $e^x$ has a radius convergence of $infty$ (and hence is termwise differentiable everywhere) is given on this page.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 3




      $begingroup$
      The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:18










    • $begingroup$
      I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
      $endgroup$
      – Eevee Trainer
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:20






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:23










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 13:11
















    2












    $begingroup$

    Personally, the simplest and best way to prove this identity is not from the definition of derivative, but to use the power series for $e^x$:



    $$e^x = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{x^k}{k!} = 1 + x + frac{x^2}{2} + frac{x^3}{2 cdot 3} + ...$$



    Since



    $$frac{d}{dx} left( f(x) + g(x) right) = frac{d}{dx} f(x) + frac{d}{dx} g(x)$$



    performing the derivative becomes quite easy and should easily show the identity.



    The power series will also prove useful if going from the definition of derivative as a limit as well, if you insist on using that. Personally, the method above I find much more elegant and intuitive but that's a matter of opinion.





    Note that interchanging the operations of derivatives and infinite summation does not always hold, i.e.



    $$frac{d}{dx} sum_{k=0}^infty f(k) = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{d}{dx} f(k)$$



    need not always hold. (While the derivative operation does "distribute" per the summation rule above, that is for finite summation, and need not hold true when we have infinite summation. That it does is a consequence of other facts.)



    My own personal understanding of the underlying reason is lacking, so I'm mostly deferring to Riley's comments on my answer in the matter. For this to be applicable in general, the sequence of derivatives for $f(k)$ must converge uniformly - which, in this case, happens to be true for the polynomials $f(k) = x^k/k!$.



    Edit



    The proof that a power series with uniform convergence may be differentiated termwise within its radius of convergence is given as theorem 2 on this page and on this page. The proof that $e^x$ has a radius convergence of $infty$ (and hence is termwise differentiable everywhere) is given on this page.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 3




      $begingroup$
      The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:18










    • $begingroup$
      I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
      $endgroup$
      – Eevee Trainer
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:20






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:23










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 13:11














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    Personally, the simplest and best way to prove this identity is not from the definition of derivative, but to use the power series for $e^x$:



    $$e^x = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{x^k}{k!} = 1 + x + frac{x^2}{2} + frac{x^3}{2 cdot 3} + ...$$



    Since



    $$frac{d}{dx} left( f(x) + g(x) right) = frac{d}{dx} f(x) + frac{d}{dx} g(x)$$



    performing the derivative becomes quite easy and should easily show the identity.



    The power series will also prove useful if going from the definition of derivative as a limit as well, if you insist on using that. Personally, the method above I find much more elegant and intuitive but that's a matter of opinion.





    Note that interchanging the operations of derivatives and infinite summation does not always hold, i.e.



    $$frac{d}{dx} sum_{k=0}^infty f(k) = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{d}{dx} f(k)$$



    need not always hold. (While the derivative operation does "distribute" per the summation rule above, that is for finite summation, and need not hold true when we have infinite summation. That it does is a consequence of other facts.)



    My own personal understanding of the underlying reason is lacking, so I'm mostly deferring to Riley's comments on my answer in the matter. For this to be applicable in general, the sequence of derivatives for $f(k)$ must converge uniformly - which, in this case, happens to be true for the polynomials $f(k) = x^k/k!$.



    Edit



    The proof that a power series with uniform convergence may be differentiated termwise within its radius of convergence is given as theorem 2 on this page and on this page. The proof that $e^x$ has a radius convergence of $infty$ (and hence is termwise differentiable everywhere) is given on this page.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Personally, the simplest and best way to prove this identity is not from the definition of derivative, but to use the power series for $e^x$:



    $$e^x = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{x^k}{k!} = 1 + x + frac{x^2}{2} + frac{x^3}{2 cdot 3} + ...$$



    Since



    $$frac{d}{dx} left( f(x) + g(x) right) = frac{d}{dx} f(x) + frac{d}{dx} g(x)$$



    performing the derivative becomes quite easy and should easily show the identity.



    The power series will also prove useful if going from the definition of derivative as a limit as well, if you insist on using that. Personally, the method above I find much more elegant and intuitive but that's a matter of opinion.





    Note that interchanging the operations of derivatives and infinite summation does not always hold, i.e.



    $$frac{d}{dx} sum_{k=0}^infty f(k) = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{d}{dx} f(k)$$



    need not always hold. (While the derivative operation does "distribute" per the summation rule above, that is for finite summation, and need not hold true when we have infinite summation. That it does is a consequence of other facts.)



    My own personal understanding of the underlying reason is lacking, so I'm mostly deferring to Riley's comments on my answer in the matter. For this to be applicable in general, the sequence of derivatives for $f(k)$ must converge uniformly - which, in this case, happens to be true for the polynomials $f(k) = x^k/k!$.



    Edit



    The proof that a power series with uniform convergence may be differentiated termwise within its radius of convergence is given as theorem 2 on this page and on this page. The proof that $e^x$ has a radius convergence of $infty$ (and hence is termwise differentiable everywhere) is given on this page.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Dec 16 '18 at 19:51









    Jam

    4,95021431




    4,95021431










    answered Dec 16 '18 at 12:09









    Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer

    5,4791936




    5,4791936








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:18










    • $begingroup$
      I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
      $endgroup$
      – Eevee Trainer
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:20






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:23










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 13:11














    • 3




      $begingroup$
      The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:18










    • $begingroup$
      I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
      $endgroup$
      – Eevee Trainer
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:20






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:23










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
      $endgroup$
      – Riley
      Dec 16 '18 at 13:11








    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:18




    $begingroup$
    The only issue I have with this is that although it is probably more enlightening, it requires that differentiation and infinite summation can be interchanged.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:18












    $begingroup$
    I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:20




    $begingroup$
    I'm confused. Can they not be interchanged owing to how the derivative effectively distributes across sums? (Not sure if distributes is the right word but you probably get what I mean.)
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:20




    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:23




    $begingroup$
    Differentiation commutes with finite summation, not necessarily with infinite summation.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:23












    $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36




    $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36




    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 13:11




    $begingroup$
    I think I should reiterate this answer is incomplete as it stands. Interchanging differentiation and infinite summation is permitted in this case because a sufficient condition is the uniform convergence of the derivatives, and the exponential does converge uniformly. Without these two facts, this answer suggests that a statement true for finite sums is true for infinite sums which is false.
    $endgroup$
    – Riley
    Dec 16 '18 at 13:11











    2












    $begingroup$

    The key fact is that



    $$lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1nright)^n to e implies lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e$$



    indeed for any $xin (n,n+1)$



    $$left(1+frac1{n+1}right)^n le left(1+frac1xright)^x le left(1+frac1{n}right)^{n+1} $$



    then take the limit and use squeeze theorem.



    Then



    $$lim_{xto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e implies frac{log left(1+frac1xright)}{frac1x}to 1 implies frac{log (1+t)}{t}to 1 , tto 0$$



    then by $h=log (1+t)to 0, t to 0$



    $$limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}=limlimits_{tto 0}dfrac{t}{log (1+t)}=1$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:19












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:34










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36










    • $begingroup$
      @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:43
















    2












    $begingroup$

    The key fact is that



    $$lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1nright)^n to e implies lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e$$



    indeed for any $xin (n,n+1)$



    $$left(1+frac1{n+1}right)^n le left(1+frac1xright)^x le left(1+frac1{n}right)^{n+1} $$



    then take the limit and use squeeze theorem.



    Then



    $$lim_{xto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e implies frac{log left(1+frac1xright)}{frac1x}to 1 implies frac{log (1+t)}{t}to 1 , tto 0$$



    then by $h=log (1+t)to 0, t to 0$



    $$limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}=limlimits_{tto 0}dfrac{t}{log (1+t)}=1$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:19












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:34










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36










    • $begingroup$
      @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:43














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    The key fact is that



    $$lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1nright)^n to e implies lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e$$



    indeed for any $xin (n,n+1)$



    $$left(1+frac1{n+1}right)^n le left(1+frac1xright)^x le left(1+frac1{n}right)^{n+1} $$



    then take the limit and use squeeze theorem.



    Then



    $$lim_{xto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e implies frac{log left(1+frac1xright)}{frac1x}to 1 implies frac{log (1+t)}{t}to 1 , tto 0$$



    then by $h=log (1+t)to 0, t to 0$



    $$limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}=limlimits_{tto 0}dfrac{t}{log (1+t)}=1$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    The key fact is that



    $$lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1nright)^n to e implies lim_{nto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e$$



    indeed for any $xin (n,n+1)$



    $$left(1+frac1{n+1}right)^n le left(1+frac1xright)^x le left(1+frac1{n}right)^{n+1} $$



    then take the limit and use squeeze theorem.



    Then



    $$lim_{xto infty} left(1+frac1xright)^x to e implies frac{log left(1+frac1xright)}{frac1x}to 1 implies frac{log (1+t)}{t}to 1 , tto 0$$



    then by $h=log (1+t)to 0, t to 0$



    $$limlimits_{hto 0}dfrac{e^h-1}{h}=limlimits_{tto 0}dfrac{t}{log (1+t)}=1$$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Dec 16 '18 at 14:34

























    answered Dec 16 '18 at 12:12









    gimusigimusi

    92.9k94494




    92.9k94494












    • $begingroup$
      How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:19












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:34










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36










    • $begingroup$
      @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:43


















    • $begingroup$
      How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:19












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:25












    • $begingroup$
      @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:34










    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for your answer..
      $endgroup$
      – Ongky Denny Wijaya
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:36










    • $begingroup$
      @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 16 '18 at 12:43
















    $begingroup$
    How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:19






    $begingroup$
    How do you go from the limit of a sequence to the limit of a function? $lim_{ntoinfty}sin(pi n)=0$ (sequential limit), but definitely $lim_{xtoinfty}sin(pi x)$ ($xin(0,infty)$) is not $0$, as it doesn't even exist.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:19














    $begingroup$
    @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25






    $begingroup$
    @egreg Are you referring to $frac{log left(1+frac1nright)}{frac1n}to 1 implies log (1+t)/t =1 , tto 0$?
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:25














    $begingroup$
    @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:34




    $begingroup$
    @egreg I've added all the details for the derivation form the foundamental limit for e.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:34












    $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36




    $begingroup$
    Thanks for your answer..
    $endgroup$
    – Ongky Denny Wijaya
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:36












    $begingroup$
    @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:43




    $begingroup$
    @OngkyDennyWijaya You are welcome. The answer depends upon the definition for $e^x$ you are allowed to use. From the definition by series the proof is straightforward. The way I've indicated is the one from the definition of $e$ as a limit of a sequence (sometimes that definition comes first that one by series).
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 16 '18 at 12:43











    0












    $begingroup$

    begin{eqnarray}
    e^x&=&sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
    dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&dfrac{d}{dx}sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
    &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{d}{dx}dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
    &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{kx^{k-1}}{k!}\
    &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{x^{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\
    &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^{k}}{k!}\
    &=&e^x
    end{eqnarray}






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      begin{eqnarray}
      e^x&=&sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
      dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&dfrac{d}{dx}sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
      &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{d}{dx}dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
      &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{kx^{k-1}}{k!}\
      &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{x^{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\
      &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^{k}}{k!}\
      &=&e^x
      end{eqnarray}






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        begin{eqnarray}
        e^x&=&sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&dfrac{d}{dx}sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{d}{dx}dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{kx^{k-1}}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{x^{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^{k}}{k!}\
        &=&e^x
        end{eqnarray}






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        begin{eqnarray}
        e^x&=&sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        dfrac{d}{dx}e^x&=&dfrac{d}{dx}sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{d}{dx}dfrac{x^k}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{kx^{k-1}}{k!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=1}^infty dfrac{x^{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\
        &=& sumlimits_{k=0}^infty dfrac{x^{k}}{k!}\
        &=&e^x
        end{eqnarray}







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 16 '18 at 12:20









        Ongky Denny WijayaOngky Denny Wijaya

        1296




        1296















            Popular posts from this blog

            Bressuire

            Cabo Verde

            Gyllenstierna