Is 1/(1+e^-(x)) equivalent to 1-e^-(x) when x is very large?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cilly28
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponential
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equivalence of the expressions 1/(1+e^-(x)) and 1-e^-(x) for very large values of x, specifically when x > 50. The original poster argues that their use of this approximation in a theorem about hole density in semiconductors was marked incorrect, despite the limiting behavior showing they are nearly equal as x approaches infinity. They emphasize that the approximation is valid and question the grading decision, suggesting that the marker may have expected a more detailed justification. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding approximations in mathematical proofs, particularly in the context of semiconductor theory. The poster advocates for clarification from the grader regarding the marking criteria.
Cilly28
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Long story short, I said on an exam that...

1/(1+e^-(x)) =~(is nearly equal to) 1-e^-(x); note* x > 50 , they are also inversely proportional when x<-50 but that isn't specific to the problem

I used this to prove a theorem regarding hole density in semiconductors ""when x is very very large""...It was marked incorrectly but the question stated that the magnitude of x would be >50. I noticed the limiting behavior of this as it goes from 50 to infinity and they appear to be equal, especially when approximations are made in the 'books proof' to simplify the equation, mainly throwing low integers away that do not effect a number of much higher magnitude.

If I made a correct approximation and still obtained the same result equation, just because I did it differently shouldn't make it incorrect, would anyone agree?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The apporximation is correct. I suggest you ask the person who marked it incorrect explain why. It may be that you were supposed to justify the approximation in more detail.
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Back
Top