Understanding Taylor Series: Finding the General Formula | Math Explained"

In summary: A logician could object to calling such a change in the formula "the same result" since logician wants it made clear which symbols are variables (in some scope) and which are constants (in some scope).If we swap the positions of all ##a##'s and ##x##'s in the expansion; that is: ##f(x) + f'(x)a + \frac{f''(x)a^2}{2!} + ...##, we would get the same result.
  • #1
PFuser1232
479
20
$$f(a + x) = \sum_{k=0}^∞ \frac{f^{(k)}(a) x^k}{k!}$$

Usually written as:

$$f(t) = \sum_{k=0}^∞ \frac{f^{(k)}(a) (t-a)^k}{k!}$$

Where ##t = a + x##
Is the taylor expansion supposed to give the same result for all ##a##? The reason this confuses me is because this seems to suggest that ##f(1 + x) = f(4 + x) = f(π + x)## and so on, which is usually not the case. Where did I go wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
MohammedRady97 said:
Is the taylor expansion supposed to give the same result for all ##a##?

Yes, in the sense that for a given [itex] t [/itex]

[itex] f(t) = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(k)}(a_1) (t-a_1)^k}{k!} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(k)}(a_2)(t-a_2)^k}{k!} [/itex]

when both series converge.
this seems to suggest that ##f(1 + x) = f(4 + x) = f(π + x)## and so on, which is usually not the case. Where did I go wrong?

In the first version you listed for Taylor series, to say that the equation holds for different [itex] a_1, a_2 [/itex] does not imply [itex] f(a_1 + x) = f(a_2 + x) [/itex] since, in general, [itex] f^{(k)}(a_1) \ne f^{(k)}(a_2) [/itex]. In the second version you listed, different values of [itex] a_1, a_2 [/itex] do not imply different values of [itex] t [/itex].
 
  • #3
Stephen Tashi said:
Yes, in the sense that for a given [itex] t [/itex]

[itex] f(t) = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(k)}(a_1) (t-a_1)^k}{k!} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(k)}(a_2)(t-a_2)^k}{k!} [/itex]

when both series converge.

In the first version you listed for Taylor series, to say that the equation holds for different [itex] a_1, a_2 [/itex] does not imply [itex] f(a_1 + x) = f(a_2 + x) [/itex] since, in general, [itex] f^{(k)}(a_1) \ne f^{(k)}(a_2) [/itex]. In the second version you listed, different values of [itex] a_1, a_2 [/itex] do not imply different values of [itex] t [/itex].

So the variable ##x## must also change for ##t## to remain well-defined.
 
  • #4
MohammedRady97 said:
So the variable ##x## must also change for ##t## to remain well-defined.

The meaning of that statement isn't entirely clear, but I'm tempted to say yes.
 
  • #5
Stephen Tashi said:
The meaning of that statement isn't entirely clear, but I'm tempted to say yes.

In order to maintain the same meaning of ##t## (and ##f(t)##) while changing the value of ##a##, we must change the value of ##x##.
 
  • #6
MohammedRady97 said:
In order to maintain the same meaning of ##t## (and ##f(t)##) while changing the value of ##a##, we must change the value of ##x##.

Yes, if we assert [itex] t = a + x [/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes PFuser1232
  • #7
Stephen Tashi said:
Yes, if we assert [itex] t = a + x [/itex].

If we were to swap the positions of all ##a##'s and ##x##'s in the expansion; that is: ##f(x) + f'(x)a + \frac{f''(x)a^2}{2!} + ...##, would we get the same result? I understand that our goal is to write a power series where the powers are constantly increasing on a variable, not a constant. But I'm curious, would this give the same result?
 
  • #8
MohammedRady97 said:
If we were to swap the positions of all ##a##'s and ##x##'s in the expansion; that is: ##f(x) + f'(x)a + \frac{f''(x)a^2}{2!} + ...##, would we get the same result? I understand that our goal is to write a power series where the powers are constantly increasing on a variable, not a constant. But I'm curious, would this give the same result?

A logician could object to calling such a change in the formula "the same result" since logician wants it made clear which symbols are variables (in some scope) and which are constants (in some scope). Technically, a symbol like "x", should appear with the scope of a quantifier (like "for each") when we write a mathematical statement. People who do calculus are careful about quantifying their variables when they do epsilon-delta proofs (e.g. for each epsilon > 0, there exists a delta ...such that...), but in other aspects of calculus they are careless. You can talk about "Taylor's Formula" as a string of symbols. To ask a precise mathematical question about its meaning you need to first state "Taylor's Theorem" as a theorem. See which quantifiers apply to which variables. Then you can ask whether the symbols representing the variables can be swapped.
 
  • Like
Likes PFuser1232
  • #9
(a_n)_1^infty
 
  • #10
({a_n})_1^ \infty
 

FAQ: Understanding Taylor Series: Finding the General Formula | Math Explained"

What is a Taylor Series and why is it important?

A Taylor Series is a mathematical representation of a function as an infinite sum of terms. It is important because it allows us to approximate complicated functions with simpler ones, making it easier to analyze and solve problems.

How do I find the coefficients of a Taylor Series?

The coefficients of a Taylor Series can be found by using the formula f(n)(a)/n!, where n is the degree of the derivative and a is the point around which the series is centered. These coefficients represent the slope of the function at that point.

What is the difference between a Maclaurin Series and a Taylor Series?

A Maclaurin Series is a special case of a Taylor Series where the series is centered around x=0. This means that the coefficients are found by taking derivatives at x=0. In general, a Taylor Series can be centered around any point.

How accurate is a Taylor Series approximation?

The accuracy of a Taylor Series approximation depends on the number of terms used in the series. The more terms that are included, the closer the approximation will be to the actual function. However, using too many terms can lead to numerical instability and round-off errors.

Can a Taylor Series be used to approximate any function?

No, a Taylor Series can only approximate functions that are infinitely differentiable. This means that the function must have continuous derivatives of all orders. Some functions, like |x|, do not have continuous derivatives and thus cannot be approximated by a Taylor Series.

Similar threads

Back
Top