Using epsilon-delta relation prove that

  • Thread starter bezgin
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Relation
In summary, the conversation is about understanding the definition of limits and proving the limit of a function with a specific example. The definition states that the limit of a function f(x) at a point a is L if f(x) approaches L as x approaches a. To prove the limit of a function, we need to find a \delta for any given \epsilon that satisfies the definition. In the specific example given, the function is f(x) = \sqrt{16-x}, the point is a = 7, and the limit is L = 3. The steps to solve the problem include finding a relation between \epsilon and \delta and using algebraic inequalities.
  • #1
bezgin
22
0
I have a serious problem with understanding the definition of limits.

Prove that Lim(x->7) Sqrt(16-x)=3

I'd be grateful if you could explain why you do each step when you solve this question. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
I would love to do it but don't have the time now.

I will do it tomorrow if no one has done it since.
 
  • #4
I remember when I was trying to understand this stuff, I could use any information I could get so I also included an explanation on what the definition means additionally to the line of reasoning to follow when solving the problem.

Intuitively, we would say that the limit of a function f(x) at a point [itex]a[/itex] is L if f(x) approaches L more and more as x approaches [itex]a[/itex] more and more.

This is what the official definition is trying to say. By chosing an arbitrary number [itex]\epsilon[/itex], we define a certain range [itex]]L-\epsilon, L+\epsilon[[/itex] of numbers around L and we ask: is there a range [itex]]a-\delta,a+\delta[ \setminus \{a\}[/itex] such that for all x in that range, f(x) is in [itex]]L-\epsilon, L+\epsilon[[/itex]? This definition meets our intuitive idea of a limit when we think of [itex]\epsilon[/itex] as being as small as we can imagine. It becomes: is it true that there is a range around [itex]a[/itex] such that for all x in that range, f(x) is as near to L as we want?

In mathematical language, we write: consider [itex]f:\mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/itex] a function and [itex]a[/itex] an accumulation point of its domain [itex]\mathcal{D}[/itex]. We say that f as L for a limit at point [itex]a[/itex] if for any given positive real number [itex]\epsilon[/itex], there exists a positive real number [itex]\delta[/itex] such that for all x element of [itex]\mathcal{D}[/itex] and such that [itex]0<|x-a|<\delta[/itex], f(x) is such that [itex]|f(x)-L|<\epsilon[/itex] (it is important to regard f(x) as the image of x by f, i.e. the number associated to x, not as the function/transformation/rule f in general) and we write

[tex]\lim_{x \rightarrow a} f(x) = L[/tex]

The [itex]0<|x-a|<\delta[/itex] and [itex]|f(x)-L|<\epsilon[/itex] parts only means " [...] such that for all x element of the domain and in the interval [itex]]a-\delta,a+\delta[ \setminus \{a\}[/itex], f is indeed confined in the interval [itex]]L-\epsilon, L+\epsilon[[/itex]. This is because for all real numbers y, z with z > 0 , [itex]|y| < z \Leftrightarrow -z < y < z \Leftrightarrow y \in ]-z,z[[/itex]. Substitute y by [itex]x-a[/itex] (respectively [itex]f(x)-L[/itex]) and z by [itex]\delta[/itex] (resp. [itex]\epsilon[/itex]) and you got your inequality (while taking care of preserving the [itex]0<|x-a|[/itex] condition). (This might seem evident to you but I remember I couldn't see it back then)

Finally, the definition can also be written in ultra compact form as: [itex]f:\mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/itex] a function and [itex]a \in \mathcal{D}'[/itex]. We say that f as L for a limit at point [itex]a[/itex] if [itex]\forall \epsilon>0, \ \exists \delta>0[/itex] such that [itex]x \in \mathcal{D} \cap V'(a,\delta) \Rightarrow f(x) \in V(L,\epsilon)[/itex].


N.B. Notice that the definition of limit does not require that the point a itself be an element of the domain. That is to say, the definition does not require that f(x) approaches f(a) as x approaches a! f(a) may or may not be defined. Actually, if L = f(a) we say that the function is continuous at the point a of its domain.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, for that particular problem: we see that [itex]f(x) = \sqrt{16-x}[/itex], [itex]\mathcal{D} = ]-\infty,16][/itex] (because negative roots are not defined in [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex]), a is 7, and L is 3. So, following our definition, we wish to see if for all numbers [itex]\epsilon>0[/itex], we can find a number [itex]\delta>0[/itex] such that [itex]x \in \mathcal{D}[/itex] and [itex]0<|x-a|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x)-L|<\epsilon[/itex]. This is the form of the definition that is most practical to work with when solving those kind of problems.

So how could we prove that there exists a such [itex]\delta[/itex] FOR ALL [itex]\epsilon[/itex]? We simply say "consider an arbitrary number [itex]\epsilon>0[/itex]". If we can show that there exists a [itex]\delta[/itex] for this epsilon, it will be true for all of them, since our epsilon is not specified!

So, step one is to write: "Consider [itex]\epsilon>0[/itex]. We wish to find a number [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that [itex]x \in ]-\infty,16][/itex] and [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |\sqrt{16-x} - 3|<\epsilon[/itex]." How we're going to do that? We're going to try to find a relation between [itex]\epsilon[/itex] and [itex]\delta[/itex] that makes this implication true.

First step in this particular problem is to multiply [itex]\sqrt{16-x} - 3[/itex] by its conjugate:

[tex]|\sqrt{16-x} - 3| = |\sqrt{16-x} - 3 \frac{\sqrt{16-x} + 3}{\sqrt{16-x} + 3}| = |\frac{7-x}{\sqrt{16-x} + 3}| = |\frac{x-7}{\sqrt{16-x} + 3}|[/tex]

(because for any real number y, |y| = |-y|)

Therefore, finding a [itex]\delta[/itex] such that [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |\sqrt{16-x} - 3|<\epsilon[/itex] is the same as finding a [itex]\delta[/itex] such that [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |x-7/\sqrt{16-x} + 3|<\epsilon[/itex]. And now we have almost won. We first have to realize that for all x of the domain, [itex]\sqrt{16-x} + 3 \geq 3[/itex], which implicates that [itex]|x-7 / \sqrt{16-x} + 3| < |x-7|[/itex]. Now since [itex]|x-7 / \sqrt{16-x} + 3| < |x-7|[/itex], if we can find a [itex]\delta[/itex] such that [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |x-7|< \epsilon[/itex], it will also be true for this same [itex]\delta[/itex] that [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |x-7 / \sqrt{16-x} + 3|<\epsilon[/itex] (because for all real numbers w, y, z, w<y and y<z ==> w<z).

Now what [itex]\delta[/itex] makes it so that [itex]0<|x-7|<\delta \Rightarrow |x-7|< \epsilon[/itex]? I believe [itex]\delta = \epsilon[/itex] does the work! :smile:

Therefor for any given [itex]\epsilon>0[/itex], we have a corresponding [itex]\delta>0[/itex] that meets the requirements set by the definition so that we can write

[tex]\lim_{x \rightarrow 7} \sqrt{16-x} = 3[/tex]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In most limit problems, the strategy is to use algebraic inequalities on |f(x) - L| so it takes the form |x - a|, so we can set a relation between [itex]\epsilon[/itex] and [itex]\delta[/itex]. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
quasar: You ought to edit your definition so that L may exist even if f(a) does not equal L!
That is, the limit-checking process is concerned about the behaviour in a PUNCTUATED neighbourhood of "a", not at "a" itself..
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Oh right, thanks.
 
  • #7
quasar987 said:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In most limit problems, the strategy is to use algebraic inequalities on |f(x) - L| so it takes the form |x - a|, so we can set a relation between [itex]\epsilon[/itex] and [itex]\delta[/itex]. Good luck.


Thank you very much indeed.
 
  • #8
Superb! Helped me understand it
 

1. Can you explain the concept of epsilon-delta relation?

The epsilon-delta relation, also known as the epsilon-delta definition, is a mathematical technique used to prove the limit of a function. It involves using two variables, epsilon (ε) and delta (δ), to show that for any small change in the input (x) of a function, there will be a corresponding small change in the output (y) of the function.

2. How is the epsilon-delta relation used to prove limits?

To prove a limit using the epsilon-delta relation, we first set an arbitrary value for epsilon (ε), which represents the desired margin of error. Then, we manipulate the function using algebra to find a corresponding value for delta (δ) that ensures that the output (y) will always be within ε units of the limit as the input (x) approaches a given value. If we can find a delta value that satisfies this condition, we can prove that the limit exists.

3. What is the significance of the epsilon-delta relation in calculus?

The epsilon-delta relation is a fundamental concept in calculus and is used to formally define the concept of a limit. It is essential in understanding the behavior of functions and their limits as the input approaches a certain value. The concept is also crucial in proving the continuity of functions and in understanding the convergence of sequences and series.

4. What are some common challenges when using the epsilon-delta relation to prove limits?

One of the main challenges when using the epsilon-delta relation is finding the appropriate delta value that satisfies the condition for all possible epsilon values. This can be time-consuming and requires strong algebraic skills. Additionally, some functions may have complex or non-linear behavior, making it difficult to find a suitable delta value that satisfies the condition.

5. Are there any alternatives to using the epsilon-delta relation to prove limits?

Yes, there are other techniques for proving limits, such as the squeeze theorem, direct substitution, and the use of L'Hôpital's rule. However, the epsilon-delta relation is the most commonly used method and is considered the most rigorous way of proving limits in calculus. It is also a crucial concept for understanding the foundations of calculus and is the basis for many other important concepts in mathematics.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
904
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
909
  • Calculus
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Calculus
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
983
Replies
11
Views
968
Back
Top