Proving Uniform Continuity for Functions with a<1

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the uniform continuity of a function defined on a closed interval, specifically under the condition that the function satisfies a Lipschitz condition with a constant less than one. Participants are exploring the implications of this condition and its relevance to the proof of uniform continuity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of uniform continuity and its distinction from ordinary continuity. There is an exploration of the implications of the Lipschitz condition and whether the constraint \(0 < a < 1\) is necessary for the proof. Some participants question the relevance of the additional properties of the function, such as its status as a contraction mapping and the existence of fixed points.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing feedback on each other's reasoning and clarifying definitions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the definitions of continuity, but there is no explicit consensus on the necessity of the condition \(0 < a < 1\) or the uniqueness of fixed points.

Contextual Notes

Participants are operating under the assumption that the function is continuous on a closed interval and are considering the implications of the given properties, including the potential need for additional theorems to establish uniqueness of fixed points.

Icebreaker
"Let [tex]f:[a,b]\rightarrow [a,b][/tex] be defined such that [tex]|f(x)-f(y)|\leq a|x-y|[/tex] where 0<a<1. Prove that f is uniformly continuous and (other stuff)."

Let e>0 and let d=e/a. Whenever [tex]0<|x-y|<d, |f(x)-f(y)|\leq a|x-y|<ad=e[/tex]. f is therefore by definition uniformly continuous.

Did I do this right? It seems too good to be true. It doesn't seem right because I did not use the fact that 0<a<1.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ordinary continuity says "For any x0, for any [tex]\epsilon[/tex]>0, there exist [tex]\delta[/tex]> 0 such that if [tex]|x-x_0|< \delta[/tex], then [tex]|f(x)-f(x_0)|< \epsilon[/tex]".
Uniform continuity says "For any [tex]\epsilon[/tex]>0, there exist [tex]\delta[/tex]> 0 such that, for any x0, if [tex]|x-a_0|< \delta[/tex], then [tex]|f(x)-f(x_0)|< \epsilon[/tex]".

The difference is that, for uniform continuity, the same [tex]\delta[/tex] works for all x0.
If [tex]|f(x)-f(y)|< a|x-y|[/tex], then in particular, for any x0, [tex]|f(x)-f(x_0)|< a|x-x_0|[/tex], then given any [tex]\epsilon[/tex], we can choose [tex]\delta= \frac{\epsilon}{a}[/tex] for all x0.

That's essentially what you are saying since you seem to be using a slightly different (equivalent) definition of uniform continuity.
 
I just find it odd that it gave me a property (0<a<1) which I did not need. Thanks for your help.
 
What was the "(other stuff)"? 0< a< 1 may be need for that. It means that f is a "contraction" function and, among other things, has a unique "fixed point".
 
The other thing was to show that there exists an e in [a,b] such that f(e) = e.
 
Isn't there a theorem you can use?
 
Assuming f(a) is not a and f(b) is not b, I've basically proved that a continuous function defined on [a,b] must intersect the identity function g(x)=x at least once. I haven't been able to prove uniqueness. And yes, there are lots of theorems I can use.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K