A Limit Wrong Using Wolfram Alpha

A Limit Wrong Using Wolfram Alpha
$\begingroup$

I want to calculate the following limit:

$$\displaystyle{\lim_{x \to 0} \cfrac{\displaystyle{\int_1^{x^2+1} \cfrac{e^{-t}}{t} \; dt}}{3x^2}}$$

For that, I use L'Hopital and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, obtaining the following:

$$\displaystyle{\lim_{x \to 0} \cfrac{\displaystyle{\int_1^{x^2+1} \cfrac{e^{-t}}{t} \; dt}}{3x^2}}=\displaystyle{\lim_{x \to 0} \cfrac{\frac{e^{-(x^2+1)}}{x^2+1} \cdot 2x}{6x}}=\lim_{x \to 0} \cfrac{e^{-(x^2+1)}}{3(x^2+1)}=\cfrac{e^{-1}}{3}$$

But if I calculate the limit in Wolfram Alpha, I get the following.

I calculated the limit also in Mathematica 8.0, and the result is still the same: $\frac 13(\frac 1e-1) $ So, what is my mistake calculating the limit?

$\endgroup$
12

4 Answers

$\begingroup$

Some more observations on Mathematica's behavior: it yields

$$ \frac{d}{dx} \int_1^{x} \frac{e^{-t}}{t} \, dt = \frac{e^{-x} - 1}{x} $$

restricted to $\Im(x) \neq 0$ or $\Re(x) \geq 0$. But changing things slightly gives

$$ \frac{d}{dt} \int \frac{e^{-t}}{t} \, dt = \frac{e^{-t}}{t}. $$

I had originally suspected there was something fishy with the branch cut: Mathematica computes

$$ \int_1^x \frac{e^{-t}}{t} \, dt = -\mathrm{Ei}(-1) - \log(x) - \Gamma(0,x) $$

again restricted to $\Im(x) \neq 0 \vee \Re(x) \geq 0$. However:

  • The point we are interested in is away from the branch discontinuity
  • I would have expected it to get the derivative right even if there were weird branch issues

(using $x+1$ in the above instead of $x$ does not make any qualitative difference)

Without limits, it computes

$$ \int \frac{e^{-t}}{t} \, dt = \mathrm{Ei}(-t) \color{gray}{+ \mathrm{constant}}$$

If you shift the integrand, you get

$$ \frac{d}{dx} \int_0^x \frac{e^{-(u+1)}}{u+1} \, du = \frac{e^{-(u+1)}}{u+1} $$

and correspondingly

$$ \lim_{y \to 0} \frac{ \int_0^y \frac{e^{-(u+1)}}{u+1} \, du }{3 y} = \frac{1}{3e} $$

(I substituted $x^2 = y$ so that wolfram would finish the calculation for me. This substitution does not make a qualitative difference in the original)

I think the key difference is that in the first version, the branch point is $t=0$, and Mathematica focuses on the behavior there -- which is inherently weird and strange because it's a branch point (and given that, I'm not sure if using the result leads to computing something correct but strange, or something ill-defined). But in the second version, the branch point is at $u=-1$, but Mathematica still focuses on $u=0$ so it gets sane results.

$\endgroup$
$\begingroup$

Mathematica is wrong because everything in sight is positive.

Unfortunately I cannot say what Mathematica is doing wrong.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

For a simple check of your answer, note that the integrand at $t=1$ is $\frac 1e$ , continuous and slowly varying. The integral is very close to $\frac {x^2}e$, supporting your answer.

$\endgroup$
$\begingroup$

Limit[Integrate[Exp[-t]/t, {t, 1, 1 + x^2}, Assumptions -> x \[Element] Reals]/(3 x^2), x -> 0] yields the correct $\frac1{3e}$. Putting the assumptions on the Limit instead of the Integrate returns the same erroneous answer: $\frac13\left(-1+\frac1e\right)$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

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

Alexander Ross
Author

Alexander Ross

Alexander Ross has covered the video game industry for a decade, writing deep dives on game design, esports tournaments, VR developments, and gaming culture.