5
$\begingroup$

I've been reading through a course on exponential functions, starting from integer-valued exponents to rational ones as in: $x^r$ from $r\in \Bbb{N}$ to $\Bbb{Z}$, and combining them to rigorously construct for $r\in\ \Bbb{Q}$. Still, this book adresses high-schoolers, and therefore "summons" an extension of the exponential notation for real exponents. Is there any formal basis for this extension? Could it be related to the density of $\Bbb{Q}$ in $\Bbb{R}$ ? Or the limit of a sequence $(x^{(r_n)})$ where $(r_n)_{n=1}$ is a sequence of rationals that converge to $r$ a non-rational exponent?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

The answer is: yes, it is related to both those things. Given any real $\alpha,$ the density of $\Bbb Q$ in $\Bbb R$ allows us to find an increasing sequence $(r_n)_{n=1}^\infty$ of rational numbers converging to $\alpha$. Depending on which positive $x$ we are considering, the sequence $(x^{r_n})_{n=1}^\infty$ will be increasing, decreasing, or constant. In the last case, the sequence readily converges, and its limit is defined to be $x^\alpha.$ In the first two cases, we note that the sequence is bounded, so by completeness of $\Bbb R$, has a least upper/greatest lower bound, one of which will be the limit of the sequence, and in either case, we define $x^\alpha$ to be the limit of the sequence.

Showing that our choice of sequence doesn't matter (so that $x^\alpha$ is well-defined in this fashion) is a bit trickier, and likely beyond the scope of your course, but that's the idea.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Choice-of-sequence can actually be handled pretty cleanly, I think, with a Dedekind cut construction - the key (and admittedly the tricky part of the construction) is that for any given $x\gt 0$, $x^q$ is monotonic (either monotonic up or monotonic down), but aside from the messiness of a quick case-based analysis (splitting $x\gt 1$ from $x\lt 1$) the only thing that's used is 'clearing denominators', comparing $x^{r/s}$ with $x^{p/q}$ by raising both to the power $sq$. $\endgroup$ – Steven Stadnicki Nov 26 '13 at 18:36
2
$\begingroup$

Yes, it is related to both of the things that you mention. Because $\mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $\mathbb{R}$, a continuous function on $\mathbb{Q}$ (for example, the function given by $q \mapsto x^q$ where $x > 0$) can have at most one continuous extension to $\mathbb{R}$. This is because density implies that every real number $r$ is a limit of a sequence of rationals $\{q_n : n \in \mathbb{N}\}$, so any continuous extension must satisfy $x^r = \lim_{n \to \infty} x^{q_n}$. To see that a continuous extension exists at all, we must check that $\lim_{n \to \infty} x^{q_n}$ exists and is indpendent of the choice of sequence $\{q_n : n \in \mathbb{N}\}$ converging to $r$.

Alternatively, a simpler definition of $x^r$ would be $$x^r = \begin{cases} \sup \{x^q : q \in \mathbb{Q} \mathbin{\&} q \le r\} & \text{if } x \ge 1,\\ \sup \{x^q : q \in \mathbb{Q} \mathbin{\&} q \ge r\} & \text{if } 0 < x < 1, \end{cases} $$ although it may take some work to check that this defines a function with the desired properties.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @CameronBuie Thanks, I will fix it. $\endgroup$ – Trevor Wilson Nov 26 '13 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ No problem! +1 for providing a simpler alternative. $\endgroup$ – Cameron Buie Nov 26 '13 at 18:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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