Now one knows that the sequence (xn/n!) has limit 0 when n increases indefinitely, for all x⩾0 (Gen. Top., IV, p. 365); thus, keeping x fixed and letting n grow indefinitely in (1) it follows, from (2) and (3), that
ex=n=0∑∞n!xn(4)
and the series on the right-hand side is absolutely and uniformly convergent on every compact interval in R. In particular, one has the formula
e=1+1!1+2!1+⋯+n!1+⋯(5)
This formula allows us to calculate rational approximations as close as we desire to the number e; one obtains
e=2.718281828…
to within 1/109. Formula (5) proves, moreover, that e is an irrational number 2 (Gen. Top., IV, p. 375).
Remark
Since the remainder in formula (1) is >0 for x>0 one has, for x>0
ex>1+1!x+2!x2+⋯+(n+1)!xn+1
and *a fortiori
ex>(n+1)!xn+1
for every integer n : one deduces from this that ex/xntends to+∞ with x, for every integer n : we shall find this result again in chap. V by another method (V, p. 231).
2 CH. HERMITE proved in 1873 that e is a transcendental number over the field Q of rational numbers (in other words, it is not the root of any polynomial with rational coefficients) (Œuvres, t. III, p. 150, Paris (Gauthier-Villars), 1912).
2. Expansions of the complex exponential, of cosx and sinx
Let z be an arbitrary complex number and consider the function φ(t)=ezt of the real variable t; we have Dnφ(t)=znezt and ez=φ(1); expressing φ(1) by means of its Taylor series of order n about the point t=0 (II, p. 62) thus gives
ez=1+1!z+2!z2+⋯+n!zn+zn+1∫01n!(1−t)neztdt
a formula which is equivalent to (1) when z is real. The remainder
rn(z)=zn+1∫01n!(1−t)neztdt
in this formula can be bounded above, in absolute value, by using the inequality of the mean; if z=x+iy we have ∣ezt∣=ext, so ∣ezt∣≤1 if x≤0, ∣ezt∣≤ex if x>0; hence
∣rn(z)∣≤(n+1)!∣z∣n+1 if x≤0
∣rn(z)∣≤(n+1)!∣z∣n+1ex if x>0.
As above we conclude that
ez=n=0∑∞n!zn
the series being absolutely and uniformly convergent on every compact subset of C.
and taking (12) into account we see that the remainder in (11) has the same sign as (−1)n+1 no matter what x; in the same way we can show that the remainder in (13) has the same sign as (−1)nx. In particular, for n=0 and n=1 in (11), and for n=1 and n=2 in (13) we obtain the inequalities
1−2x2≤cosx≤1for all x
(15)
x−6x3≤sinx≤xfor all x≥0.
(16)
Finally, on putting z=ix in (9) we have
cosx=n=0∑∞(−1)n(2n)!x2n
(17)
sinx=n=0∑∞(−1)n(2n+1)!x2n+1
(18)
these series being absolutely and uniformly convergent on every compact interval.
It is clear, furthermore, that the formulae (17) and (18) remain valid for every complexx, the series on the right-hand side being absolutely and uniformly convergent on every compact subset of C. In particular, for every x (real or complex)
coshx=n=0∑∞(2n)!x2n
sinhx=n=0∑∞(2n+1)!x2n+1.
3. The binomial expansion
Let m be an arbitrary real number. For x>0 we have
Dn(xm)=m(m−1)…(m−n+1)xm−n;
the Taylor formula of order n about the point x=0 for the function (1+x)m shows that for every x>−1
(1+x)m=1+(1m)x+(2m)x2+⋯+(nm)xn+rn(x)
with
rn(x)=n!m(m−1)…(m−n)∫0x(1+tx−t)n(1+t)m−1dt
where we put (nm)=n!m(m−1)…(m−n+1). The formula (19) reduces to the binomial formula (Alg., I, p. 99) when m is an integer >0 and n≥m; by extension, we again call it the binomial formula, and the coefficients (nm) are called the binomial coefficients, when m is an arbitrary real number and n is an arbitrary integer >0.
The remainder in (19) has the same sign as (n+1m) if x>0, and the sign of (−1)n+1(n+1m) if −1<x<0. Since 1+tx−t≤∣x∣ for t>−1 in the interval with endpoints 0 and x, we have the following bound for the remainder, for m and n arbitrary and x>−1:
n!m(m−1)…(m−n)∫0x(1+tx−t)n(1+t)m−1dt
≤(nm−1)xn((1+x)m−1).
If we suppose x≥0, and n≥m−1, then (1+t)n−m+1≥1 on the interval of integration, so
0≤∫0x(1+t)n−m+1(x−t)ndt≤∫0x(x−t)ndt=n+1xn+1
which gives the estimate
∣rn(x)∣≤(n+1m)xn+1(x≥0,n≥m−1)
for the remainder. On the other hand, suppose that −1≤m<0; if one makes the change of variable u=x(1+t)x−t in the integral (19) one obtains
To estimate the integral for x>−1 we remark that, since m+1<1, the integral ∫01(1−u)m+1undu converges and bounds the right-hand side of (22) since 1+ux>1−u. Now, for −1<x<0 the hypothesis on m implies that all the terms (1m)x,(2m)x2,…,(nm)xn which appear in the right-hand side of (19) are ≥0, and hence rn(x)≤(1+x)m, from which, on dividing by (1+x)m,
n!m(m−1)…(m−n)xn+1∫01(1+ux)m+1undu≤1.
Moreover, for −1<x<0 the factor in front of the integral is ≥0, so, letting x approach −1,
n!m(m−1)…(m−n)∫01(1−u)m+1undu≤1
and consequently for −1≤m<0 and x>−1 we have
∣rn(x)∣≤(1+x)m∣x∣n+1.
(23)
From these inequalities we can, for a start, deduce that for ∣x∣<1 we have
(1+x)m=n=0∑∞(nm)xn
(24)
the right-hand side (called the binomial series) being absolutely and uniformly convergent on every compact subset of ]−1,+1[. Indeed one can write
(nm)=(−1)n(1−1m+1)(1−2m+1)…(1−nm+1)
(25)
whence
(nm)≤(1+1∣m+1∣)(1+2∣m+1∣)…(1+n∣m+1∣).
If ∣x∣≤r<1 there is an n0 such that 1+n0∣m∣<r′1, where r<r′<1; whence, putting
k=(1+1∣m∣)(1+2∣m∣)…(1+n0∣m∣)
we have
(nm−1)xn≤k∣x∣n0(r′r)n−n0,
which proves the proposition. On the other hand, for x>1, the absolute value of the general term of the series (24) increases indefinitely with n if m is not an integer ≥0; indeed, from (25), we have for n>n1≥∣m+1∣
(nm)≥(1−1m+1)(1−2m+1)…(1−n1m+1)
(1−n1+1∣m+1∣)…(1−n∣m+1∣).
Let n0≥n1 be such that for n≥n0 we have 1−n∣m+1∣>x′1, where 1<x′<x. If we put
gives the expression for the remainder in the general formula (19) without having to integrate; the formula (23) reduces in this case to the expression for the sum of the geometric series (or progression) (Gen. Top., IV, p. 364).
In the second place let us study the convergence of the binomial series for x=1 or x=−1 (excluding the trivial case m=0):
a)m≤−1. The product with general term 1−nm+1 converges to +∞ if m<−1, to 1 if m=−1, so it follows from (25) that for x=±1 the general term of the binomial series does not tend to 0.
b)−1<m<0. This time the product with general term 1−nm+1 converges to 0, so the inequality (21) shows that rn(1) tends to 0. Thus the binomial series converges for x=1 and has sum 2m; moreover, the binomial series is uniformly convergent on every interval ]x0,1] with −1<x0≤1, by virtue of what we saw above and of (21). On the other hand, for x=−1 all the terms on the right-hand side of (24) are ≥0, if this series were convergent one could deduce that the binomial series would be normally convergent on [−1,1] and so would have for its sum a continuous function on this interval, which is absurd because (1+x)m is not bounded on [−1,1] for m<0. We conclude that also for x=1 the binomial series is not absolutely convergent.
c)m>0. The definition of rn(x) shows that rn(x) tends to the limit rn(−1) when x tends to −1; on passing to the limit in (20) one concludes that ∣rn(−1)∣≤(nm−1), and since m−1>−1 we see that for x=−1 the binomial series is convergent. Furthermore, for n>m+1 all the terms of this series have the same sign; thus the binomial series is normally convergent on the interval [−1, 1] and has sum (1 + x)^m on this interval.
4. EXPANSIONS OF log(1 + x), OF Arc tan x AND OF Arc sin x
Let us integrate the two sides of (26) between 0 and x; we obtain the Taylor expansion of order n of log(1 + x), valid for x > −1
The remainder has the same sign as (−1)^n if x > 0, and is < 0 if −1 < x < 0; further, when x > 0, we have 1 + t ≥ 1 for 0 ≤ t ≤ x, and, when −1 < x < 0, we have 1 + t ≥ 1 − |x| for x ≤ 0; whence the estimates for the remainder
∫0x1+ttndt≤n+1∣x∣n+1for x≥0(28)
∫0x1+ttndt≤(n+1)(1−∣x∣)∣x∣n+1for −1<x≤0.(29)
From these last two formulae one deduces immediately that for −1 < x ≤ 1 one has
log(1+x)=n=1∑∞(−1)n−1nxn
(30)
the series being uniformly convergent on every compact interval contained in ]−1, +1], and absolutely convergent for |x| < 1.
On the other hand, for |x| > 1 the general term in the series on the right-hand side of (30) increases indefinitely in size with n (III, p. 106). For x = −1 the series reduces to the harmonic series, which has sum +∞ (Gen. Top., IV, p. 365).
Similarly, let us replace x by x^2 in (26) and integrate both sides between 0 and x; we obtain the Taylor expansion of order 2n − 1 for Arc tan x, valid for all real x
The remainder has the sign of (−1)^n x, and since 1 + t^2 ≥ 1 for all t we have the estimate
∫0x1+t2t2ndt≤2n+1∣x∣2n+1(32)
from which one deduces that, for |x| ≤ 1,
Arctanx=n=1∑∞(−1)n−12n−1x2n−1(33)
the series being uniformly convergent on [−1, +1], and absolutely convergent for |x| < 1.
In particular, for x = 1 one obtains the formula
4π=1−31+51+⋯+(−1)n2n+11+⋯.
For |x| > 1 the general term of the right-hand side of (33) increases indefinitely in size with n.
Finally, for the Taylor expansion of Arc sin x we start from the expansion of its derivative (1 − x^2)^{-1/2}; this last expansion is obtained by replacing x by −x^2 in the expansion of (1 + x)^{-1/2} as a binomial series; for |x| < 1 this gives
On taking the primitive of the preceding expansion we obtain
Arc sin x=x+213x3+2.41.35x5+⋯+2.4.6…2n1.3.5…(2n−1)2n+1x2n+1+Rn(x)
where R_n(x) has the sign of x and satisfies the inequality
∣Rn(x)∣≤∫0x1−t2t2n+2dt.
Further, the relation (35) shows that R_n(x) tends to a limit when x approaches 1 or −1, so one has
∣Rn(1)∣≤∫011−t2t2n+2dt.
But the right-hand side of (37) tends to 0 when n tends to +∞ : for, since the integral ∫01dt/1−t2 is convergent, for every ε > 0 there is an a such that 0 < a < 1 and ∫a1dt/1−t2≤ε; on the other hand we have
and so there is an n_0 such that for n ≥ n_0 one has (2n+3)1−a2a2n+3≤ε, whence, finally, |R_n(x)| ≤ 2ε for |x| ≤ 1 and n ≥ n_0. Thus one has
Arcsinx=n=0∑∞2.4.6…2n1.3.5…(2n−1)2n+1x2n+1
(38)
the right-hand side being normally convergent on the compact interval [−1, 1].
In the opposite case one can show, as for the binomial series, that the general term in the series on the right-hand side of (38) increases indefinitely in absolute value for |x| > 1. On putting x=21, for example, in (38) we obtain a new expression for the number π:
6π=n=0∑∞2.4.6…2n1.3.5…(2n−1)(2n+1)22n+11
which is much better suited than formula (34) to calculating approximations to π (see Calcul numérique); one thus obtains
π=3.141592653…
accurate to within 1/109.³
³ The number π is not only irrational (cf. III, p. 126, exerc. 5) but even transcendental over the field Q of rational numbers, as was shown for the first time in 1882 by Lindemann (see for example D Hilbert, Gesammelte Abhandlungen, v. 1, p. 1, Berlin (Springer), 1932).