we do know the formula for e: $$ \lim_{n \to \infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^{n} = e $$ I was hoping to prove it using LH. Assume we don't know the value $$\lim_{n \to \infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^{n} = x $$ Then we can use logarithms to solve this and since $$ \ln(x) $$ is continuous everywhere we can write $$\lim_{n \to \infty}n \ln(1+\frac{1}{n}) = \ln x $$ apply LH: $$\lim_{n \to \infty}\frac{\ln(1+\frac{1}{n})}{\frac{1}{n}} = \ln x $$ $$\lim_{n \to \infty}\frac{\frac{1}{(1+\frac{1}{n})}\frac{-1}{n^2}}{\frac{-1}{n^2}} = \ln x $$ this simplifies to $$\lim_{n \to \infty}\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{n}} = \ln x $$ which we can evaluate to $$ \frac {1}{1+0} = 1 = \ln x$$ Therefore we come at $$ \ln x = 1 $$ $$x=e$$ What I'm wondering about is whether i am actually able to use the natural logarithm because i assume i don't know what 'e' is. Is this actually validor i have to take the limit purely as a definition of the euler number?
-
Yeah, but when i use the fact, that the derivative of a logarithm whose base is unknown, is 1/n... is invalid, isn't it? – Michal Dvořák Nov 24 '17 at 21:29
-
3But that limit isn't $e$... – Angina Seng Nov 24 '17 at 21:31
-
Oh, messed that up :S Corrected it now – Michal Dvořák Nov 24 '17 at 21:32
-
Yup, had my formulation of the limit wrong. There had to be + sign instead of -. Now everything should be correct. – Michal Dvořák Nov 24 '17 at 21:37
-
1What is your definition of the euler number $\mathrm{e}$? And what is your definition of $\ln$? – Nathanael Skrepek Nov 24 '17 at 21:42
-
That limit is usually (at least the way I learned things) taken as the definition of $e$. You can, however, prove that the sequence $a_{n} = (1+\frac{1}{n})^n$ is convergent, by proving that it's increasing and bounded. I remember that the proof was not easy for me as a beginner, so it might be worth your time. Of course, you can also take $\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{n!}$ as the definition of $e$, provided you know some basic things about series first. – Matija Sreckovic Nov 24 '17 at 21:43
-
The limit as you've stated is usually the definition of $e$. Therefore this question cannot be answered unless you provide your own definition of $e$ – Dylan Nov 24 '17 at 22:09
3 Answers
A person can define $\ln(x)$ and prove its derivative is $1/x$, etc, without knowing anything about $(1+1/n)^n$:
For $x>0$ define $$\ln(x)=\int_1^x\frac{dt}t.$$
It follows that $\ln'(x)=1/x$. Hence $\ln$ is strictly increasing on $(0,\infty)$. And it's clear that $$\lim_{x\to\infty}\ln(x)=\int_0^1\frac{dt}t=\infty.$$Similarly $\lim_{x\to0}\ln(x)=-\infty$.
So $\ln$ is a strictly increasing differentiable bijection from $(0, \infty)$ onto $\mathbb R$. So it has a strictly increasing differentiable inverse. Define $\exp:\mathbb R\to(0,\infty)$ to be the inverse of $\ln$. Define $e=\exp(1)$.
Note that $$\ln(xy)=\int_1^x\frac{dt}t+\int_x^{xy}\frac{dt}t=\int_1^x\frac{dt}t+\int_1^y\frac{dt}t=\ln(x)+\ln(y),$$by a simple substitution in the last integral. Hence $\ln(x^n)=n\ln(x)$ by induction; hence $\exp(nx)=\exp(x)^n$.
Now you don't even need L'Hopital, just the definition of the derivative shows that $$\lim_{n\to\infty}n\ln(1+1/n)=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{\ln(1+1/n)-\ln(1)}{1/n}=\ln'(1)=1/1=1.$$ Since $\exp$ is the inverse of $\ln$ and $\exp$ is continuous this shows that $$\lim(1+1/n)^n=\lim\exp(n\ln(1+1/n))=\exp(1)=e$$.

- 89,985
All of the objects involved here ($e, \ln x$, etc.) have several equivalent definitions and it takes some interesting work to prove that they're all equivalent; until you do questions like "how do I prove X" are ambiguous because they might be easy using some definitions and hard using others (before you've proven that they're all equivalent).
For example, you can define $\ln x$ without knowing what $e$ is, by defining it as the integral
$$\ln x = \int_1^x \frac{dt}{t}.$$
Using this integral you can prove the fundamental properties that $\ln (ab) = \ln a + \ln b$ and also that $\ln (1 + x) \approx x$ for $x$ small, which is enough to run your proof. Now you can define $e^x$ as the inverse of $\ln x$, if you want.
My preferred way to prove all of these equivalences is to start from the definition that $e^x$ is the unique function $f(x)$ satisfying $f(0) = 1$ and $f'(x) = f(x)$. From here, you can show that
$$e^x = \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( 1 + \frac{x}{n} \right)^n$$
by showing that this limit defines a function $g(x)$ which also satisfies $g(0) = 1$ and $g'(x) = x$; hence it must be equal to $e^x$, and now you can plug in $x = 1$. This identity can be interpreted as using Euler's method with smaller and smaller step sizes to approximate the solution to $f'(x) = f(x)$.
Generally speaking it's much nicer to prove things about $e^x$ rather than $e$, and arguably it is by far the more fundamental object.

- 419,620
-
+1 for the first paragraph. Often this is not mentioned in elementary calculus textbooks and leads to ample confusion in the minds of beginners in calculus. – Paramanand Singh Nov 25 '17 at 09:57
I supplied an elementary proof (not my own) that $\lim_{n \to \infty} (1+1/n)^n$ exists here:
What is the most elementary proof that $\lim_{n \to \infty} (1+1/n)^n$ exists?
$e$ is then the name of that limit.
Once you know that the limit exists you can then do a variety of things to show that it is the same as your definition of $e$.

- 107,799