Sign up ×
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 know this must be wrong, but I am confused as to where the mathematical fallacy lies.

Here is the 'proof':

$$f '(x) = \lim_{ h\to0}\frac{f(x+h)-f(x)}{h}$$

L'Hôpital's Rule (The previous limit was $\frac{0}{0}$):

$$ f '(x) = \lim_{ h\to 0}\frac{f '(x+h)-f '(x)} {1} $$

Plugging in $h$:

$$ f '(x) = f '(x+0)-f '(x) $$


$$ f '(x) = 0 $$

I'm assuming my application of L'Hôpital's rule is fallacious, but it evaluates to an indeterminate form so isn't L'Hôpital's rule still valid?

share|cite|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 40 down vote accepted

Taking the derivative with respect to $h$ gives:

$$f'(x) = \lim_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{f'(x + h)}{1}$$

Since $f(x)$ is constant with respect to $h$.

share|cite|improve this answer

You differentiated the numerator with respect to $x$ but the denominator with respect to $h$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.