1

In the derivation of the formula given by the Maclaurin series expansion of a function, given below, $$f(x)=f(0)+f'(0)x+\frac{f''(0)}{2!}x^2+\frac{f'''(x)}{3!}x^3+\cdots$$ we begin by assuming that the function $f(x)$ can be written in the form $$a_0+a_1x+a_2x^2+a_3x^3+\cdots$$

and then go on to differentaite repeatedly etc.

My question is, how do we prove that this assumption is correct and reasonable in the first place? As far as I can see, all we have shown is if our intial assumption is correct the $f(x)$ can be written as the power series stated above.

Thank you for your help.

  • 1
    $f(x)$ is just defined to be the power series $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_nx^n$ when obtaining the formula for the $n$th coefficient $a_n$. It is a separate (and interesting) problem to see when/where a Taylor series for a function $f$ actually converges to $f$. Here, when I say the Taylor series for $f$, I mean the series that is obtained when $a_n=\frac{f^{(n)}}{n!}$ – Nicholas Roberts Dec 02 '20 at 23:01
  • @NicholasRoberts so basically I'm asking for the answer to the separate and interesting problem you mention then? – A-Level Student Dec 02 '20 at 23:06
  • 2
    This is the heart of "Taylor's Theorem": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor%27s_theorem – Nicholas Roberts Dec 02 '20 at 23:08

2 Answers2

1

The assertion that there is a power series $\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n$ such that, near $0$, you have$$f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n\tag1$$is actually equivalent to the assertion that (again, near $0$),$$f(x)=f(0)+f'(0)x+\frac{f''(0)}{2!}x^2+\frac{f'''(0)}{3!}x^3+\cdots\tag2$$In that sense, yes, the assumption is correct and reasonable.

Here's a proof of the fact that they are equivalent. First of all, if a power series $\sum_{n=0}^\infty$ converges on some open interval centered at $0$, then its sum is a $C^\infty$ function, and its derivative is $\sum_{n=0}^\infty na_{n+1}x^n$. So, since we have $(1)$, then $f(0)=a_0$. Then $f'(x)=a_1+2a_2x+3a_3x^2+\cdots$, and therefore $a_1=f'(0)$. And so on… So, $(2)$ holds. And if $(2)$ holds, just take $a_n=\frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}$ and you have $(1)$.

Note that if $f$ is a $C^\infty$ function, then the series $(2)$ still makes sense. And then an interesting problem is whether or not its sum is or not $f(x)$ near $0$. That doesn't always occur.

1

Functions that can be written as a power series are called analytic functions.

Given a function $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$, one can ask, when can we write $$ f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_nx^n,\quad |x|<R $$ for some $R>0$.

In a mathematical statement, we do not "prove" assumptions, which are given. Though it is natural to ask when such assumptions can be indeed satisfied. (A statement that has assumptions that can never be true is boring. For example, "if $1>2$, then $5>9$" is a true statement. But one does not "prove" that the assumption "$1>2$" is true.)

A necessary condition for having the power series above is that $f$ must be infinitely differentiable on $(-R,R)$. But this is not sufficient, as the classical example of bump functions show: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_function.


You seem to confuse yourself with what the statement is.

Suppose $f:(-R,R)\to\mathbb{R}$ can be written as $$ f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n, |x|<R $$ Then, it is true that $$ f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}x^n, |x|<R $$

In order to prove this assertion, one does NOT prove that $$ f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n, |x|<R $$ is true. One uses it as a given assumption.

Proof. By the assumption, $f$ is infinitely differentiable on $(-R,R)$. On the other hand, it is a property of the power series that one can differentiate term by term, namely, $$ f'(x)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n nx^{n-1},\quad |x|<R $$ which implies that $f'(0)=a_1$. Similarly, one can show that $$ f^{(n)}(0)=a_n n! $$


Newly added.

As for when a given $C^\infty$ function can be written as a power series, one has the following theorem (see Stewart's Calculus).

Suppose $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is an infinitely differentiable function. Let $a$ be a real number. Define $a_n=\frac{f^{(n)}(a)}{n!}$ for each $n$ with the convention that $f^{(0)}(a):=f(a)$ and $0!=1$. If for each $x$ with $|x-a|<R$, $$ \lim_{n\to\infty} f(x)-T_n(x)=0 $$ where $T_n(x):=\sum_{k=0}^n a_n(x-a)^n$, then $$ f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n(x-a)^n,\quad |x-a|<R. $$

This theorem is not so interesting in that it is simply unwrapping the definition of an infinite series.

You may also want to look at this post: Theorems that give sufficient condition for a $C^{\infty}$ function to be analytic

  • Ah, that helps quite a bit, thanks! So, how do we show when the assumption applies to a given function? – A-Level Student Dec 02 '20 at 23:22
  • @A-LevelStudent: Are you asking how do we show the statement written in the last paragraph? –  Dec 02 '20 at 23:24
  • No, I know how to show that $f^{(n)}(0)=a_nn!$, but I was asking how do you know if a given function can be written as an infinite series? – A-Level Student Dec 03 '20 at 17:43
  • @A-LevelStudent: It is not that I "know", but that it is an ASSUMPTION. Do you understand what an assumption means in mathematics? This theorem does not care what happens if a given function can not be written as a power series. It tells you what happens IF the given function can be written as a power series. If you function cannot be written as a power series, this theorem tells you NOTHING. –  Dec 08 '20 at 17:14
  • Sorry, it seems like I was unclear. I was asking how you know if a given function can be written as a power series, ie when can I know that the assumption holds. For example, how would I know if the assumption holds for $f(x)=\sin x$ ? – A-Level Student Dec 08 '20 at 21:56
  • @A-LevelStudent OK. Thanks for the input. I see what you mean. It turns out that that is a tricky question in real analysis. As mentioned in my answer, in order to write a given function as a power series (at $0$), a necessary condition is that the function $f$ must be $C^\infty$ at $0$. But this is not sufficient as the mentioned classical example shows. Now it is legitimate to ask whether one has a sufficient condition. You may now read this post: Theorems that give sufficient condition for a $C^{\infty}$ function to be analytic –  Dec 09 '20 at 19:53
  • @A-LevelStudent: answer edited. –  Dec 09 '20 at 20:12