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 $h$:
$$ f '(x) = f '(x+0)-f '(x) $$
Simplifying:
$$ f '(x) = 0 $$
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?
Answer
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 $h$.
No comments:
Post a Comment