Limit as x tends towards +infinity for cos(1/x) to be 1

  • Thread starter Thread starter grizz45
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
AI Thread Summary
The limit of cos(1/x) as x approaches +infinity is correctly calculated as 1, since cos(1/infinity) simplifies to cos(0), which equals 1. The book's answer of (0,3) and (3,+infinity) appears to be a misprint or related to a different problem. The continuity of the cosine function supports the conclusion that the limit is indeed 1. The user expresses concern over multiple incorrect answers in the same section of the book. This indicates a potential issue with the textbook rather than a misunderstanding of the limit concept.
grizz45
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I have worked out the limit as x tends towards +infinity for cos(1/x) to be 1, as cos (1/infinity) would be cos(0) which is 1. However the answer in the book with the question says that the answer should be (0,3) and (3,+infinty)! Is this a misprint or have i gine drastically wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


grizz45 said:
I have worked out the limit as x tends towards +infinity for cos(1/x) to be 1, as cos (1/infinity) would be cos(0) which is 1. However the answer in the book with the question says that the answer should be (0,3) and (3,+infinty)! Is this a misprint or have i gine drastically wrong?

Of course
\lim_{x \to \infty} \cos(1/x)
doesn't tend toward (0,3) and (3,infty) (how would that make any sense?). That is probably the answer to a different problem (have you checked the problem number and chapter number is correct?). Your idea is correct except for the fact that 1/infinity makes no sense, but since cos is continuous and defined in 0 you have:
\lim_{x \to \infty} 1/x = 0 \Rightarrow \lim_{x \to \infty} \cos(1/x) = \cos(0) = 1
so your answer is correct.
 


i have checked the problem number and everything...i think there is a massive misprint as i have done some other questions from the same section and the answers all seem to be wrong as there are of the same format as the answer in the first post!
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top