Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Suppose we want to find limit of the following polynomial
$$\lim_{x\to-\infty}(x^4+x^5).$$ If we directly put here $-\infty$, we get "$-\infty +\infty$" which is definitely undefined form, but otherwise if factor out $x^5$, our polynomial will be of the form $x^5(1/x+1)$. $\lim_{x\to-\infty}\frac 1x=0$, so our result will be $-\infty*(0+1)$,which equal to $-\infty$. I have exam in a 3 days and interested if my last procedure is correct? Directly putting $x$ values gives me undefined form, but factorization on the other hand, negative infinity, which one is correct?

share|cite|improve this question
It's correct. The method will work for any polynomial (factor out the leading term). – David Mitra Dec 20 '11 at 10:01
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Your factoring method is fine.

In general given a polynomial, $$P(x)=a_nx^n+a_{n-1}x^{n-1}+\cdots +a_1 x+a_0,\quad a_n\ne0,$$ you can factor out the leading term when $x\ne0$: $$ P(x)= x^n\Bigl(\,a_n+{ a_{n-1}\over x}+ \cdots +{a_1\over x^{n-1}} +{a_0\over x^n} \,\Bigr),\quad x\ne0. $$ When taking the limit as $x$ tends to an infinity, the parenthetical term above will tend towards $a_n$.

From this,

$$ \lim_{x\rightarrow-\infty} P(x) = \cases{\phantom{-}{\rm sign}(a_n) \infty, & n\text{ even}\cr -{\rm sign}(a_n) \infty, & n\text{ odd}} $$ and

$$ \lim_{x\rightarrow \infty} P(x) = {\rm sign}(a_n) \infty. $$

Informally, for large $x$, a polynomial behaves as its leading term. So, to compute a limit "at infinity", you could just drop all but the leading term of the polynomial and take the limit of just the leading term.

share|cite|improve this answer
everything is clear,thanks very much @David Mitra – dato datuashvili Dec 20 '11 at 10:17

The second method is correct, since it shows that when $x$ becomes "really negative", $x^4$ will weight less than $x^5$.

The first method is not correct, since "$-\infty+\infty$" can give anything: for example with $f(x)=x+a$ and $g(x)=-x$, where $a$ is a real number, we have $\lim_{x\to+\infty}f(x)=+\infty$, $\lim_{x\to+\infty}g(x)=-\infty$ but $\lim_{x\to+\infty}f(x)+g(x)=a$, so we can get any real number, $+\infty$ or $-\infty$ as your example shows. It's possible that $f(x)+g(x)$ doesn't converge, for example with $f(x)=x+\cos x$ and $g(x)=-x$.

share|cite|improve this answer
nice example thanks very much – dato datuashvili Dec 20 '11 at 10:11

Yes. generally if $\rm\:L\:$ is a field map preserving sums and products and $\rm\ L(g/f) = 0\ $ then

$$\rm L(f+g)\ =\ L(f\ (1+g/f))\ =\ L(f)\ \left(L(1) + L(g/f)\right)\ =\ L(f) $$

Induction yields the dominant term lemma: the L-value of a sum is that of the dominant term(s).

When $\rm\:L\:$ is a limit the map need not be total (everywhere defined). This concept is abstracted algebraically in the important notion of a valuation or place.

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.