Using epsilon-delta relation prove that

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bezgin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the epsilon-delta definition of limits in the context of proving that the limit of the function Sqrt(16-x) as x approaches 7 equals 3. Participants explore the theoretical aspects of limits, provide explanations, and share their reasoning processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in understanding the definition of limits and requests a detailed explanation of the proof.
  • Another participant shares a link to an external resource on epsilon-delta proofs.
  • A participant indicates they will attempt to provide a proof the following day if no one else does.
  • A detailed explanation of the epsilon-delta definition is provided, emphasizing the intuitive understanding of limits and the formal mathematical language used.
  • The explanation includes a step-by-step approach to proving the limit, starting with the definition and manipulating the expression to establish a relationship between epsilon and delta.
  • One participant suggests editing the definition to clarify that the limit can exist even if the function value at that point does not equal the limit.
  • Another participant acknowledges the correction regarding the limit-checking process focusing on the neighborhood around "a" rather than the value at "a" itself.
  • Participants express gratitude for the explanations and indicate that the discussion has helped them understand the topic better.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no clear consensus on the proof itself, as participants are sharing different perspectives and clarifications on the definition of limits. Some participants agree on the importance of the epsilon-delta definition, while others focus on the nuances of its application.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various interpretations of the epsilon-delta definition and its implications, highlighting the complexity of the concept and the need for careful consideration of definitions and conditions.

Who May Find This Useful

Students and learners seeking to understand the epsilon-delta definition of limits, as well as those looking for detailed explanations and examples of limit proofs in calculus.

bezgin
Messages
22
Reaction score
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
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.
 
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:
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:
Oh right, thanks.
 
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.
 
Superb! Helped me understand it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K