Derivative of [ln( x)]n by the Limit Definition

╬
Francis J. O’Brien, Jr., Ph.D.
Aquidneck Indian Council
Newport, RI
October 29, 2012

Preliminaries

By the limit definition of a derivative,

f ( x + h) − f ( x )
f ′( x ) =
d
f ( x) = lim
dx h →0 h
or, for the function f ( x) = [log( x)]n

d
[ln( x)] = lim
n [ln( x + h)]n − [ln( x)]n
.
dx h →0 h

[ ]
Note that [ln( x)]n is also written as ln n ( x) but this not the same as the
[ ]
quantity, ln( x) n as indicated below. For simplicity we assume n is a positive integer.
The Chain Rule provides the most straightforward solution for this derivative:

= n[ln( x)]n −1. We seek to provide a proof using only

dy dy du 1
If u = ln( x) & y = u n , then =
dx du dx x
the above Limit Definition. The proof of this derivative can be done by the laws of logarithms,
the derivative of ln x and the algebraic formula 1, a n − b n .
We assume the reader knows the derivative of ln(x) :

d ln( x + h) − ln( x) 1
ln( x) = lim = .
dx h →0 h x

The YouTube video by The Khan Academy shows this derivation by the limit definition. Any
calculus textbook also shows the proof.
It is well known that ln( x) n = n ln( x) , and

1
See Finney and Thomas (chapter 3, “Derivatives,” pp. 142-143) who use this to show derivative of xn.
 Francis J. O’Brien, Jr., 2012. 1
 d d n
ln( x) n = n ln( x) = .
dx dx x

The expression ln( x) n is a sum of the logs by the Product Rule for logs,
ln( x1 x2 ) = ln( x1 ) + ln( x2 ) , extended to any finite number of x terms. That is,

n times
    n times
 
ln( x) n = ln( x ⋅ x  x) = ln( x) + ln( x) +  + ln( x) = n ln( x).

The log expression ln( x) n = n ln( x) is not to be confused with the expression [ln( x)]n .
The derivative of [ln( x)]n from the limit definition is less obvious and not shown in common
textbooks. This is the derivative of the product 2 of logs:

n times
   
n
[ln( x)] = ln( x) ln( x)ln( x) .

We need one other important tool, the factorization of the difference a n − b n for positive
integer n > 1 :

   
n terms
 
a − b = (a − b )  a
n n n −1
+a n−2
b + a b +  + a 2b n − 3 + ab n − 2 + b n −1  .
n −3 2
 
 
As such,

a 2 − b 2 = (a − b )(a + b )
(
a 4 − b 4 = (a − b ) a 3 + a 2b + ab 2 + b3 . )
Derivation

With these tools we can show the derivative of [ln( x)]n . Restating the derivative to solve:

d
[ln( x)]n = lim
[ln( x + h)]n − [ln( x)]n .
dx h →0 h

2
We could use the Product Rule for derivatives on this expansion. But we seek its proof by the limit definition.

 Francis J. O’Brien, Jr., 2012. 2

 In the difference, a n − b n , let

a = ln( x + h)
b = ln( x)

Then, by the Product Rule for limits, we split up the terms,

d
[ln( x)]n =
dx

lim
[ln( x + h)]n − [ln( x)]n =
h →0 h

n times
 

[ln( x + h) − ln( x)] lim [ln( x + h)]n −1 + [ln( x + h)]n − 2 [ln( x)] + [ln( x + h)]n −3 [ln( x)]2 +  + [ln( x)]n −1  =
lim  
h →0 h h → 0 
 
n[ln( x)]n −1.
1
x
In the first term, lim
[ln( x + h) − ln( x)] ,
we recognize this limit to be the derivative of ln(x) ;
h →0 h
ln( x + h) − ln( x) d 1
i.e., lim = ln( x) = . When we set h → 0 in the second limit we see that
h →0 h dx x
there are n identical terms each of value, [ln( x)]n −1.
d 1
Based on the derivation, we see that, if n = 1, ln( x) = .
dx x

References

Finney, R.L. and G.B. Thomas, Jr. Calculus, 1990. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

The Khan Academy. Proofs of Derivatives of Ln(x) and e^x.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nQejB-XPoY>.

 Francis J. O’Brien, Jr., 2012. 3