Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol.

14, 2016 7

University of New Mexico

A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem

with their Refrains
Huda E. Khalid1 Florentin Smarandache2 Ahmed K. Essa3
1
University of Telafer, Head of Math. Depart., College of Basic Education, Telafer, Mosul, Iraq. E-mail: hodaesmail@yahoo.com
2
University of New Mexico, 705 Gurley Ave., Gallup, NM 87301, USA. E-mail: smarand@unm.edu
3
University of Telafer, Math. Depart., College of Basic Education, Telafer, Mosul, Iraq. E-mail: ahmed.ahhu@gmail.com

Abstract. The Neutrosophic Precalculus and the
Neutrosophic Calculus can be developed in many
ways, depending on the types of indeterminacy one
has and on the method used to deal with such
indeterminacy. This article is innovative since the
form of neutrosophic binomial factorial theorem was
constructed in addition to its refrains.
Two other important theorems were proven with their
corollaries, and numerical examples as well. As a
conjecture, we use ten (indeterminate) forms in
neutrosophic calculus taking an important role in
limits. To serve article's aim, some important
questions had been answered.

Keyword: Neutrosophic Calculus, Binomial Factorial Theorem, Neutrosophic Limits, Indeterminate forms in
Neutrosophic Logic, Indeterminate forms in Classical Logic.

1 Introduction (Important questions) 2. Let

3
Q 1 What are the types of indeterminacy? = +
There exist two types of indeterminacy 0 + = 3 + 3 2 + 3 2 2 + 3 3
a. Literal indeterminacy (I). 0 + = 3 + (3 2 + 3 2 + 3 )
3
As example: = 0, = 1 = . (5)

2 + 3 (1) In general,
2+1
b. Numerical indeterminacy. = , (6)
As example:
where + = {1,2,3, }.
(0.6,0.3,0.4) , (2)
Basic Notes
meaning that the indeterminacy membership = 0.3. 1. A component I to the zero power is
Other examples for the indeterminacy com- undefined value, (i.e. 0 is undefined),
ponent can be seen in functions: (0) = 7 9 or
since 0 = 1+(1) = 1 1 = which is

(0 1) = 5 or () = [0.2, 0.3] 2 etc. impossible case (avoid to divide by ).
2. The value of to the negative power is
Q 2 What is the values of to the rational power? undefined value (i.e. , > 0 is
1. Let undefined).
= +
Q 3 What are the indeterminacy forms in neutros-
0 + = 2 + (2 + 2 )
ophic calculus?
= 0, = 1. (3)
In classical calculus, the indeterminate forms
In general, are [4]:
2 0
= (4) , , 0 , 0 , 00 , 1 , . (7)
0
+
where = {1,2,3, }.

Huda E. Khalid, Florentin Smarandache & Ahmed K. Essa, A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem
with their Refrains
8 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 14, 2016

The form 0 to the power (i.e. 0 ) is an [2.1, 2.5] [2.1, 2.5]

lim ln = lim =
indeterminate form in Neutrosophic calculus; it is 0 0 1 1
tempting to argue that an indeterminate form of ln ln 0
[2.1, 2.5] [2.1, 2.5]
type 0 has zero value since "zero to any power is = =
1 0
zero". However, this is fallacious, since 0 is not a
power of number, but rather a statement about 2.1 2.5
limits. = [ , ] = (, )
0 0
=
Q 4 What about the form 1 ? Hence = = 0
The base "one" pushes the form 1 to one OR it can be solved briefly by
while the power pushes the form 1 to I, so 1 is = [2.1,2.5] = [02.1 , 02.5 ] = [0,0] = 0.
an indeterminate form in neutrosophic calculus.
Example (3.2)
Indeed, the form , is always an
lim [3.5,5.9] [1,2] = [3.5,5.9] [9,11][1,2] =
indeterminate form. [9,11]
Q 5 What is the value of , ? [3.5,5.9] [91 , 112 ] = [(3.5)(9), (5.9)(121)] =
Let 1 = 2 , , 2 = 2 ; it is obvious that [31.5,713.9].
lim 2 = , lim 2 = 0 , lim 2 = 1; while Example (3.3)
0
we cannot determine if
2 0 1, lim [3.5,5.9] [1,2] = [3.5,5.9] [1,2]

therefore we can say that 2 = 2 indeterminate = [3.5,5.9] [1 , 2 ]
form in Neutrosophic calculus. The same for , = [3.5 () ,5.9 ()]
where [2]. = (, ) = .

2 Indeterminate forms in Neutrosophic Example (3.4)

Logic Find the following limit using more than one
[4,5]+11
It is obvious that there are seven types technique lim .
0
of indeterminate forms in classical calculus [4],
Solution:
0 The above limit will be solved firstly by using the
, , 0. , 00 , 0 , 1 , .
0 L'Hpital's rule and secondly by using the
As a conjecture, we can say that there are ten rationalizing technique.
forms of the indeterminate forms in Neutrosophic Using L'Hpital's rule
calculus 1 1
lim ([4, 5] + 1) 2 [4,5]
0 , 0 , , , , , , , 0 2
0 [4,5]
( ), . = lim
0 2([4, 5]
+ 1)
Note that: [4,5] 4 5
= = [ , ] = [2,2.5]
1 2 2 2
= = = .
0 0 Rationalizing technique [3]
3 Various Examples [4,5] + 1 1 [4,5] 0 + 1 1
lim =
Numerical examples on neutrosophic limits 0 0
would be necessary to demonstrate the aims of this [4 0, 5 0] + 1 1 [0, 0] + 1 1
= =
work. 0 0
0 + 1 1 0
Example (3.1) [1], [3] = =
The neutrosophic (numerical indeterminate) values 0 0
= undefined.
can be seen in the following function:
Find lim (), where () = [2.1,2.5] . Multiply with the conjugate of the numerator:
0
Solution:
Let = [2.1,2.5] ln = [2.1, 2.5] ln

Huda E. Khalid, Florentin Smarandache & Ahmed K. Essa, A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem
with their Refrains
 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 14, 2016 9

[4, 5] + 1 1 [4, 5] + 1 + 1 Again, Solving by using L'Hpital's rule

lim
0 [4, 5] + 1 + 1 2 + 3 [1, 2] [3, 6]
2 lim
3 +3
([4, 5] + 1) (1)2
= lim 2 + 3 [1, 2]
0 = lim
([4, 5] + 1 + 1) 3 1
[4, 5] + 1 1 2 (3) + 3 [1, 2]
= lim
= lim 3 1
0
([4, 5] + 1 + 1) = 6 + 3 [1, 2]
[4, 5] = 3 [1, 2]
= lim
0
([4, 5] + 1 + 1) = [3 1, 3 2]
= [5, 4]
[4, 5]
= lim
0
([4, 5] + 1 + 1) The above two methods are identical in results.

[4, 5] [4, 5] 4 New Theorems in Neutrosophic Limits

= =
([4, 5] 0 + 1 + 1) 1 + 1
Theorem (4.1) (Binomial Factorial )
[4, 5] 4 5 1
lim ( + ) = ; I is the literal indeterminacy,
= = [ , ] = [2, 2.5].
2 2 2
Identical results. e = 2.7182828
Proof
Example (3.5) 1 1 0 1 1

Find the value of the following neutrosophic limit ( + ) = ( ) ( ) + ( ) 1 ( )
0 1
2 +3[1,2][3,6]
lim
+3
using more than one 1 2
1 3
3 + ( ) 2 ( ) + ( ) 3 ( )
technique . 2 3
1 4
Analytical technique [1], [3] + ( ) 4 ( ) +
2 +3[1,2][3,6]
4
lim 1 1
3 +3
= + . . + (1 )
By substituting = -3 , 2!
(3)2 + 3 (3) [1, 2] (3) [3, 6] 1 2 1 2
lim + (1 ) (1 ) + (1 ) (1 )
3 3 + 3 3! 4!
3
9 9 [1 (3), 2 (3)] [3, 6] (1 ) +
=
0 1
0 [6, 3] [3, 6] [3, 6] [3,6] It is clear that 0

= = 1
0 0 lim( ) = + + + + +=+
[3 6, 6 3] [3, 3] 2! 3! 4!
= = ,
0 0
=1 !
0 1 1
which has undefined operation , since 0 lim( + ) = , where e = 1 +
0 =1 ! , I is the

[3, 3]. Then we factor out the numerator, and literal indeterminacy.
simplify:
2 + 3 [1, 2] [3, 6] Corollary (4.1.1)
lim =
3 +3 1
( [1, 2]) ( + 3) lim( + ) =
0
lim = lim ( [1,2])
3 ( + 3) 3 Proof:-
= 3 [1,2] = [3, 3] [1,2] 1
Put =

= ([3,3] + [1,2]) = [5, 4].
It is obvious that , as 0
1 1
lim( + ) = lim ( + ) =
0
( using Th. 4.1 )
Corollary (4.1.2)

lim ( + ) = , where k > 0 & 0 , I is the

literal indeterminacy.

Huda E. Khalid, Florentin Smarandache & Ahmed K. Essa, A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem
with their Refrains
10 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 14, 2016

Proof 1
= . = .
ln( + ) 1
lim ( + ) = lim [( + ) ] ln( + )


1
Put = = = = . 1

ln( + )
Note that 0
1
(ln )( ) 1
lim = 1
lim ( + ) = lim [( + ) ] 0 +
0 lim ( + )
0
(using corollary 4.1.1 ).
1
1 = .
1
= [lim ( + ) ] = () = =

0 lim ( + )
0
1
Corollary (4.1.3) = using corollary (4.1.1)
()
1 1

lim( + ) = () = ,
0 = =
where 1 & > 0. + + 1
Proof Corollary (4.2.1)
The immediate substitution of the value of in the
above limit gives indeterminate form , lim =
0 1 +
1 0 1
+
i.e. lim( + ) = lim( + )0 =
0 0 Proof
So we need to treat this value as follow:-
Put = =
1 1
1 0 0
lim( + ) = lim [( + ) ] = [lim ( + ) ]
0 0 0
1 1 lim = lim = . lim
put = = = 0 +

0 +

0 +


As 0 , 0 using Th. (4.2)
1 1
1 = . ( )
lim ( + ) = lim [( + ) ] 1 +
0 0
1 Corollary (4.2.2)
1
= [lim ( + ) ] 1
0 lim =
0 + 1 +
Using corollary (4.1.1) Proof

= () =

Let = , 0 0
+ = ln( + ) = +
Theorem (4.2) = ln( + )
()[ ]
lim = =
0 + 1+ + ln( + ) +
Where > 0, 1 1
()[ ] =
Note that lim = lim 1
0 + 0 +
ln( + )

Proof 1
=
Let = + = ln( + ) = 1
ln( + )
ln + ln
1
ln( + ) = ln + lim = lim 1
0 + 0
ln( + ) ln( + )
=
1
(ln )( ) ( ) = 1
= ln lim ( + )
+ 0
+
using corollary (4.1.1)

= 1 1 1
ln( + ) = =
+ ln() + + 1

Huda E. Khalid, Florentin Smarandache & Ahmed K. Essa, A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem
with their Refrains
Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 14, 2016 11

Corollary (4.2.3) 5 Numerical Examples

Example (5.1)
lim =
0 1 + 54
+ Evaluate the limit lim
0 +

54
Proof
Solution
let = = 54 45

lim = (using corollary 4. 2.1)
0 0 0 +
54
1+

lim = lim = . lim using Example (5.2)
0 + 0 + 0 +

4
Corollary (4.2.2) to get Evaluate the limit lim
0 32
1 Solution
= . ( )=
1 + 1 + 3[ 4 ]
( + )
Theorem (4.3) 4
4
( + )
ln( + ) lim = lim 4
lim = (1 + ) 0 32 0 3[32 ]
0 ( + )
32
Proof ( + 2 )
3
ln( + ) ln( + ) + 3[ 4 ]
lim = lim lim
0 0 0
( + ) lim ( + )
Let = ln( + ) + = ln( + 4 0 4
= 2
) 3[3 ]
lim lim ( + )
0 0 32
( +
32
)
+ = + = =
(using corollary (4.2.3) on numerator & corollary
0 0 (4.2.1) on denominator )
ln( + ) + 4
lim
0 = 1 + 4 = 1.
+ 23
= lim 1 + 32
0

5 Conclusion
lim =
0 lim )
+ 0( + In this article, we introduced for the first time
using corollary (4.2.2) to get the result a new version of binomial factorial theorem
containing the literal indeterminacy (I). This
= = (1 + )
1 theorem enhances three corollaries. As a
1 + conjecture for indeterminate forms in classical
calculus, ten of new indeterminate forms in
Theorem (4.4)
Neutrosophic calculus had been constructed.
Prove that, for any two real numbers , Finally, various examples had been solved.
a
lim = 1 , where , > 0 & , 1
0 b
Proof
References
The direct substitution of the value in the above
0
limit conclude that ,so we need to treat it as [1] F. Smarandache. Neutrosophic Precalculus and
0
Neutrosophic Calculus. EuropaNova Brussels,
follow: 2015.
a[a ] a + [2] F. Smarandache. Introduction to Neutrosophic
a
lim = lim a +
a Statistics. Sitech and Education Publisher, Craiova,
0 b 0 b[b ] b + 2014.

b + b [3] H. E. Khalid & A. K. Essa. Neutrosophic Pre-

a[a ] calculus and Neutrosophic Calculus. Arabic
lim lim ( a + ) b
a + 0 version of the book. Pons asbl 5, Quai du Batelage,
=
b[b ] lim( b + ) a Brussells, Belgium, European Union 2016.
lim
b + 0 [4] H. Anton, I. Bivens & S. Davis, Calculus, 7th
(using Th.(4.2) twice (first in numerator second in Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002.
denominator ))
a
1+ b
= b = 1. Received: November 7, 2016. Accepted: November 14, 2016
a
1+

Huda E. Khalid, Florentin Smarandache & Ahmed K. Essa, A Neutrosophic Binomial Factorial Theorem
with their Refrains