4.1.26 · D4Calculus I — Limits & Derivatives

Exercises — L'Hôpital's rule — proof using linear approximation, 0 - 0, ∞ - ∞, other indeterminate forms

2,098 words10 min readBack to topic

Before any problem, always run the type check: confirm the form is genuinely indeterminate. If it is not, L'Hôpital is forbidden and would give a wrong answer.


Level 1 — Recognition

Goal: identify the form, then apply the rule once (or see that you cannot).

Recall Solution 1.1

Type check. Top , bottom . Form is ✔ — L'Hôpital is allowed. Differentiate top and bottom separately (not the quotient rule): Take the limit: .

Recall Solution 1.2

Type check. , bottom : form ✔. Recall .

Recall Solution 1.3

Type check first! Top , bottom . This is not indeterminate. L'Hôpital is not allowed; the answer is just direct substitution: Had you blindly differentiated, you'd get — the wrong answer. The form gate is not optional.


Level 2 — Application

Goal: apply the rule, possibly more than once, or convert a product/quotient.

Recall Solution 2.1

Type check. , : form ✔. Differentiate: top (chain rule), bottom .

Recall Solution 2.2

Type check. , : ✔. First application: . Still (top ). Second application: . Still . Third application: . Why repeat? Each new fraction is again a legitimate , so the rule re-applies. We stop the instant the top or bottom no longer both vanish.

Recall Solution 2.3

Type check. As : and , so form — indeterminate but not a fraction, so L'Hôpital can't touch it yet. Convert to a fraction. Put the part on top: Differentiate: top , bottom . Why put on top? Its derivative is simple; the alternative split has an ugly derivative. Choose the split that simplifies.


Level 3 — Analysis

Goal: choose the right conversion; compare growth rates; handle .

Recall Solution 3.1

Type check. As , and : form . Indeterminate — the two infinities may cancel to anything. Combine over a common denominator to expose a : First application: top ; bottom . Second application: top ; bottom .

Recall Solution 3.2

Type check. , : form ✔. Apply three times (the polynomial degree drops by one each time; is untouched): Interpretation. The exponential beats any fixed power — see Exponential & Logarithm Growth Rates. The picture below shows overtaking and never looking back.

Figure — L'Hôpital's rule — proof using linear approximation, 0 - 0, ∞ - ∞, other indeterminate forms
Recall Solution 3.3

Type check. As , , so and : form . Combine: Apply once: top ; bottom .


Level 4 — Synthesis

Goal: combine logarithms, exponentials, and repeated L'Hôpital.

Recall Solution 4.1

Type check. Base , exponent : form — indeterminate, and exponents are invisible to differentiation until we bring them down. Take a log. Let , so Convert to a fraction by putting the factor on top over : Differentiate. Top: . Bottom: . So , hence .

Recall Solution 4.2

Type check. Base , exponent : form — indeterminate. Log it. Let , so , form . Convert: , form ✔. Differentiate: . So , hence .

Recall Solution 4.3

Type check. Base , exponent : form — indeterminate. Log it. , form ✔. Differentiate: . So , hence .


Level 5 — Mastery

Goal: recognise when L'Hôpital fails, and use the deeper theory.

Recall Solution 5.1

Type check. Top , bottom : form . But watch what L'Hôpital does: top ; bottom . Ratio — the fraction flipped and cycles forever. The RHS limit never resolves, so the rule gives nothing. Use algebra instead. Factor out of the root: Lesson: L'Hôpital requires the RHS limit to exist. When it cycles, that hypothesis fails — retreat to algebra.

Recall Solution 5.2

Direct (correct) evaluation. Since , (squeeze). Hence What L'Hôpital would give. Top , bottom , ratio , which oscillates in and has no limit. No contradiction. L'Hôpital's theorem says: if exists, then it equals . It says nothing when fails to exist. The implication runs one way only — a non-existent limit does not condemn . Here has a perfectly good limit, .

Recall Solution 5.3

The Taylor expansion of near is So , and Why they agree. L'Hôpital applied times to a isolates the ratio of the -th order terms; that is exactly the ratio of leading nonzero Taylor coefficients. Here the numerator's first surviving term is and the denominator's is , giving — the same we ground out with three derivative passes. This is L'Hôpital seen from orbit: compare the leading Taylor terms.


Wrap-up recall

Recall Which method for which problem?

Determinate form ()? ::: Just substitute — L'Hôpital forbidden. Product ? ::: Rewrite as a fraction , choose the split that simplifies. Difference ? ::: Common denominator to expose . Power ? ::: Take , solve, then exponentiate the result. Rule cycles or RHS oscillates? ::: Abandon it — use algebra, squeeze, or Taylor series.


Connections

  • Mean Value Theorem — the Cauchy MVT underwrites every solution here.
  • Linear Approximation & Tangent Lines — the intuition behind "ratio of speeds."
  • Taylor Series — Problem 5.3's shortcut: ratio of leading terms.
  • Indeterminate Forms — the seven-form zoo these exercises tour.
  • Limits — Definition & Laws — the squeeze theorem used in 5.2.
  • Exponential & Logarithm Growth Rates — Problem 3.2's moral.