AP Calculus AB and BC
Limit of x/e^x as x Approaches Infinity Is 0
The limit of x over e to the x as x approaches infinity is 0. Substitution gives infinity over infinity, an indeterminate form, so L'Hopital's rule applies: differentiating top and bottom separately leaves 1 over e to the x, which goes to 0. The exponential outgrows the linear numerator.
Settled by L'Hopital's rule.
Applying the rule once
Check the hypotheses before differentiating anything. Both and are unbounded as , both are differentiable, and is never . The form is one of the two the rule accepts.
The new quotient is no longer indeterminate. A fixed numerator over an unbounded denominator collapses, so one pass was enough, and that is the signal to stop.
By the numerator has reached while the denominator has passed million. The race is not close, and it only gets worse from there.
Why substitution fails
Pushing through the fraction gives , a form that records no information about the outcome. Both parts grow without bound, and the answer turns entirely on which grows faster, which is exactly what the form suppresses.
The tempting reading is that the two infinities cancel to . They do not. The quotient has the same form and runs to , while has it too and goes to .
Unbounded is not the same as fast
At the numerator has grown by a factor of from its value at , while has grown by a factor of about million. Both head to , and the indeterminate form is precisely the statement that this comparison has not been made yet.
The growth hierarchy this fixes
Nothing here was special to the first power. Each pass of the rule drops the exponent by one while the denominator regenerates itself, so a numerator of needs passes and ends as the constant over .
Pairing that with the logarithm result gives the ordering that settles most end-behaviour questions on sight.
Flipping the fraction flips the answer, since a positive function tending to has an unbounded reciprocal.
The mistakes students make
- Differentiating with the quotient rule instead of taking the two pieces separately. L'Hopital replaces by , never by .
- Applying the rule a second time out of habit. After one pass the expression is , which is not indeterminate, so the rule no longer applies.
- Reading as . The form is indeterminate, and the two comparisons above show it can produce anything.
- Assuming the other end behaves the same way. As the quotient is with negative and unbounded, so it runs to and nothing is indeterminate about it.
Not sure which technique a limit wants?
The Limit Method Chooser walks the decision from direct substitution through factoring, the conjugate, and L'Hopital, and says why each one applies or fails.
Frequently asked questions
Does this mean is a horizontal asymptote?
On the right only. The curve flattens onto the -axis from above as , so is a horizontal asymptote there. Heading left the function dives to , so that side has no asymptote at all.
Can this be done without L'Hopital's rule?
Yes, with a squeeze. For every term of the series for is positive, so and therefore . Both bounds go to , so the function between them does too.
What about ?
Still . One hundred passes reduce the numerator to the constant over , which collapses. The exponential beats every fixed power eventually, however large the power and however late the crossover: keeps climbing until before it turns.