Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm trying to solve this question:

Let $f:[0,+\infty) \to \mathbb{R}$ be derivable and $\lim_{x \to +\infty} f'(x) = L$, then $\lim_{x\to \infty}\frac {f(x)}{x}=L$.

I'm trying to solve this question using l'Hôpital rule, but I couldn't use it, because I don't know if $\lim_{x\to +\infty} f(x)=+\infty$.

I need help.

Thanks a lot.

share|improve this question
    
You do not need to know this to use l'Hôpital, see for example how the rule is stated in Rudin's "Principles of mathematical analysis". –  Andres Caicedo Feb 9 '13 at 17:04
2  
@AndresCaicedo I'm reading Rudin, we need only the denominator goes to infinity, am I right? thanks a lot! –  user42912 Feb 9 '13 at 17:11
2  
Yes. I've never understood why most texts (which do not include proofs anyway) don't just present this version. –  Andres Caicedo Feb 9 '13 at 17:12
    
Thanks for pointing this out, Andres! –  1015 Feb 9 '13 at 20:00

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

As mentioned in the comments, L'Hôpital's rule is applicable, and readily yields the result.


Here's a proof that does not appeal to L'Hôpital's rule (though it essentially uses the same proof as that result).

First assume $L$ is finite. Let $\epsilon>0$.

By the Mean Value Theorem and the hypothesis that $\lim\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} f'(x)=L$, there is a number $a$ so that for all $x>a$ $$\tag{1} L-\epsilon < {f(x)-f(a)\over x-a} <L+\epsilon. $$ Since ${x-a\over x}=1-{a\over x}>0 $ for $x>a$ it follows from $(1)$ that $$\tag{2} (L-\epsilon)\Bigl(1-{a\over x}\Bigr) < {f(x)\over x}- {f(a)\over x} < (L+\epsilon)\Bigl(1-{a\over x}\Bigr), $$ for $x>a$.

Since $\lim\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} {f(a)\over x}=\lim\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty }{a\over x}=0$, it follows from $(2)$ that $$ \textstyle \limsup\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} {f(x)\over x}\le L+\epsilon \ \ \text{and}\ \ \liminf\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} {f(x)\over x}\ge L-\epsilon. $$

Since $\epsilon$ was arbitrary, we have $$\textstyle \limsup\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} {f(x)\over x}\le L \ \ \text{and}\ \ \liminf\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty} {f(x)\over x}\ge L; $$ whence the result follows.


If $L=\infty$, the argument is similar; but one starts with an arbitrary $M>0$, and then finds an $a$ so that for all $x>a$, $$\tag{1} {f(x)-f(a)\over x-a} >M. $$ Then $$\ {f(x)\over x}- {f(a)\over x} >M\Bigl(1-{a\over x}\Bigr). $$ From this it follows that for $x$ sufficiently large ${f(x)\over x}\ge M\cdot(1/2)-1/2. $ Since $M$ was arbitrary, we have $\lim\limits_{x\rightarrow\infty}{f(x)\over x}=\infty$.

The argument for $L=-\infty$ proceeds as in the argument for $L=\infty$.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.