To tackle this question, we need to analyze the given statements about the functions \( f \) and \( g \). We know that \( f(x) = g(x) \sin x \) and we have specific conditions on \( g \) at \( x = 0 \). Let's break down each statement step by step.
Examining Statement-1
Statement-1 claims that:
lim(x→0) [g(x) cot x – g(0) cosec x] = f ''(0)
To evaluate this limit, we first need to find \( f''(0) \). We can use the product rule to differentiate \( f(x) \):
- First derivative:
Using the product rule, we have:
f'(x) = g'(x) sin x + g(x) cos x
- Second derivative:
Now, differentiating again:
f''(x) = g''(x) sin x + 2g'(x) cos x - g(x) sin x
Evaluating at \( x = 0 \):
f''(0) = g''(0) sin(0) + 2g'(0) cos(0) - g(0) sin(0) = 0 + 0 - 0 = 0
Now, let's analyze the limit:
As \( x \to 0 \), we know that \( \cot x = \frac{\cos x}{\sin x} \) and \( \csc x = \frac{1}{\sin x} \). Therefore, we can rewrite the expression:
g(x) cot x - g(0) cosec x = g(x) \frac{\cos x}{\sin x} - g(0) \frac{1}{\sin x}
Factoring out \( \frac{1}{\sin x} \):
lim(x→0) [g(x) cos x - g(0)] / sin x
Using L'Hôpital's Rule (since both the numerator and denominator approach 0 as \( x \to 0 \)), we differentiate the numerator and denominator:
Numerator: g'(x) cos x - g(x) sin x
Denominator: cos x
Evaluating this limit gives us \( f''(0) \), confirming that Statement-1 is indeed true.
Analyzing Statement-2
Statement-2 states that:
f '(0) = g(0)
We already found \( f'(0) \) earlier:
f'(0) = g'(0) sin(0) + g(0) cos(0) = 0 + g(0) = g(0)
This means Statement-2 is also true.
Connecting the Statements
Now, we need to determine if Statement-2 provides a correct explanation for Statement-1. While both statements are true, Statement-2 does not explain the limit in Statement-1, which is more complex and involves the second derivative. Therefore, we conclude that:
Final Evaluation
Both statements are true, but Statement-2 does not serve as a correct explanation for Statement-1. The correct answer is:
Option 2: Statement-1 is True, Statement-2 is True; statement-2 is NOT a correct explanation for statement-1.