Prove Limit l of f(x) is Zero with abs(x) < ε

  • Thread starter Miike012
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
Can you also provide a summary of the conversation with the new information?In summary, the problem is to determine the limit l for the given a and prove that it is the limit by showing how to find a δ such that abs(f(x) - l)< ε for all x satisfying 0< abs( x - a) < δ. The function f(x) = x(3-cos(x^2)) has a limit of zero near a=0. To prove this, we can show that abs(x(3-cos(x^2)))< ε by choosing a suitable value for δ. The book's solution suggests choosing δ = ε/4 and using the fact that -1 ≤ cos(x^2) ≤ 1
  • #1
Miike012
1,009
0
Problem: Determine the limit l for the given a, and prove that it is the limit by showing how to find a δ such that abs(f(x) - l)< ε for all x satisfying 0< abs( x - a) < δ.

** abs = absolutue value of...

Solution:
f(x) = x(3-cos(x^2))

The limit l is zero. hence the product of some number times zero is zero.

abs(f(x) - 0)< ε = abs(x(3-cos(x^2)).

abs((3-cos(x^2))≤ 1, abs(x(3-cos(x^2))< abs(x)

Thus for every number x, If abs(x) < ε Then abs(x(3-cos(x^2)),

Which finishes the proof, concluding that the limit of f(x) near zero is zero.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
For future reference, use | for absolute value. It's easier to read.

Miike012 said:
f(x) = x(3-cos(x^2))

The limit l is zero.

Is the problem to show that [itex]\lim_{x \to 0} f(x) = 0[/itex]?

Miike012 said:
hence the product of some number times zero is zero.

I'm not sure where this comes from.

Miike012 said:
abs(f(x) - 0)< ε = abs(x(3-cos(x^2)).

The bolded part is good start. I'm not sure why you're equating epsilon to |x(3-cos(x2)|.

Miike012 said:
abs((3-cos(x^2))≤ 1, abs(x(3-cos(x^2))< abs(x)

Neither of these statements are true. Do you see why?

Miike012 said:
Thus for every number x, If abs(x) < ε

It's unclear how you concluded the bolded part.

Miike012 said:
Then abs(x(3-cos(x^2))

Then what? Is there supposed to be an equation here?
 
  • #3
"I'm not sure why you're equating epsilon to |x(3-cos(x2)|."
Are you asking me why i said |x(3-cos(x2)| < ε?

"Neither of these statements are true. Do you see why?"
|x(3-cos(x2)| is not less than or equal to 1.. is that right?
abs(x(3-cos(x^2))< abs(x), I am not sure why that is not correct...?

"It's unclear how you concluded the bolded part."

Because I said |x(3-cos(x2)| < ε, then I found out |x(3-cos(x2)| < |x|
Then I assumed |x(3-cos(x2)| < |x - 0| < ε Thus |x| < ε
 
  • #4
Miike012 said:
"I'm not sure why you're equating epsilon to |x(3-cos(x2)|."
Are you asking me why i said |x(3-cos(x2)| < ε?

No. I'm asking why you're setting ε = |x(3-cos(x^2)|.

Miike012 said:
"Neither of these statements are true. Do you see why?"
|x(3-cos(x2)| is not less than or equal to 1.. is that right?

Yes.

Miike012 said:
abs(x(3-cos(x^2))< abs(x), I am not sure why that is not correct...?

-1 ≤ cos(x2) ≤ 1, so:

|x(3-cos(x2)| ≥ |x(3-1)| = |2x| > |x|. This is the opposite of what you want.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
-1 ≤cos(x2) ≤ 1, I am assuming you picked +- 1 because of the range of the function?
In general when proving limits how do I determine the appropriate interval for my function? For example If I had some polynomial g could I say -n ≤g(x) ≤ n, where n is an integer?
 
  • #6
Miike012 said:
-1 ≤cos(x2) ≤ 1, I am assuming you picked +- 1 because of the range of the function?

Correct. Cosine is bounded between -1 and +1.

Miike012 said:
In general when proving limits how do I determine the appropriate interval for my function? For example If I had some polynomial g could I say -n ≤g(x) ≤ n, where n is an integer?

You don't want to use integers. That's what the epsilon is for. By letting ε > 0, this covers every case.
 
  • #7
The books solution was...
-1 ≤ cos(x2) ≤ 1, so |(3-cos(x2)| <=4, and thus |x(3-cos(x2) - 0| = |x|*|x(3-cos(x)|<= 4|x|.

So we take delta = ε/4.

So in the first step they said -n ≤ cos(x2) ≤ n where n = 1, so If I had another situation like this example but the function was say a polynomial... then How would I pick n.
I hope I am making sense.

I understand that I have to use epsilon when I am saying |f(x) - l|.
 
  • #8
I know that gb7nash asked you this, but I didn't see any answer.

Precisely, what limit are you trying to evaluate? Mostly, what is a ?

[itex]\displaystyle\lim_{x\,\to\,a}(x(3-\cos(x^2)))[/itex]
 
  • #9
a is zero, so the limit is zero..
Sorry I forgot to put the value of a in my problem.
 

1. How do you prove the limit of a function is zero?

To prove the limit of a function is zero, you must show that for any given value of ε (epsilon), there exists a corresponding value of δ (delta) such that when the distance between the input value and the limit point is less than δ, the output value will be within ε of zero. This can be done using the formal definition of a limit or by using limit laws and algebraic manipulation.

2. What does abs(x) < ε mean in the context of proving a limit is zero?

In this context, abs(x) < ε means that the absolute value of the difference between the input value (x) and the limit point is less than ε. In other words, the input value is within a certain distance (ε) from the limit point.

3. What is the significance of proving a limit is zero?

Proving a limit is zero is significant because it shows that as the input values approach a certain point, the output values get closer and closer to zero. This can be useful in determining the behavior of a function and can also be used to prove the continuity of a function at a certain point.

4. What is the difference between a one-sided limit and a two-sided limit?

A one-sided limit only considers the behavior of a function as the input values approach the limit point from one direction (either from the left or the right). A two-sided limit considers the behavior of a function as the input values approach the limit point from both directions. In order to prove a limit is zero, both one-sided and two-sided limits must be shown to be zero.

5. Can a limit be proven to be zero without using the formal definition?

Yes, a limit can be proven to be zero by using limit laws and algebraic manipulation. This method involves showing that the function can be simplified to a form where the limit is clearly zero. However, using the formal definition is considered to be a more rigorous and accurate method of proving a limit is zero.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
872
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
277
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
281
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
841
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
706
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top