- #1
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
- 5,049
- 7
Hey!
I want to show that the function $f(x)=(1+x)^n, x\geq -1$ is for $n\in \mathbb{N}$ convex.
So that the function is convex it must hold $f''(x)>0$.
The second derivative is $f''(x)=n(n-1)(1+x)^{n-2}$.
It holds that $n>0$ and $n-1\geq 0$. We also have that $x\geq -1$. Therefore, we get that $f''(x)\geq 0$ for $n\in \mathbb{N}$, or not? (Wondering)
Is there a problem if we have $\geq 0$ instead of $>0$ ? (Wondering)
Or do we have to use the bernoulli inequality or an other way? (Wondering) Then I want to determine the equation of the tangent at $x_0=0$.
The equation of the tangent at $x_0=0$ is $t(x)=f'(0)x+f(0)$.
We have that $f'(x)=n(1+x)^{n-1}$. Therefore we get $$t(x)=nx+1$$ right? (Wondering) Then I want to say what estimate we get for the function $f(x)$ from the above information. What exactly do we have to say here? What is meant by "estimate" ? (Wondering)
I want to show that the function $f(x)=(1+x)^n, x\geq -1$ is for $n\in \mathbb{N}$ convex.
So that the function is convex it must hold $f''(x)>0$.
The second derivative is $f''(x)=n(n-1)(1+x)^{n-2}$.
It holds that $n>0$ and $n-1\geq 0$. We also have that $x\geq -1$. Therefore, we get that $f''(x)\geq 0$ for $n\in \mathbb{N}$, or not? (Wondering)
Is there a problem if we have $\geq 0$ instead of $>0$ ? (Wondering)
Or do we have to use the bernoulli inequality or an other way? (Wondering) Then I want to determine the equation of the tangent at $x_0=0$.
The equation of the tangent at $x_0=0$ is $t(x)=f'(0)x+f(0)$.
We have that $f'(x)=n(1+x)^{n-1}$. Therefore we get $$t(x)=nx+1$$ right? (Wondering) Then I want to say what estimate we get for the function $f(x)$ from the above information. What exactly do we have to say here? What is meant by "estimate" ? (Wondering)