- #1
Odious Suspect
- 43
- 0
I was trying to come up with a proof of the well-known limit of products theorem. Suppose we have
$$\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|<\epsilon _1\Rightarrow \delta _1>|t-c|>0$$
and
$$\left|F_2 (t)-L_2\right|<\epsilon _2\Rightarrow \delta _2>|t-c|>0$$
$$\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|\left|F_2 (t)-L_2\right|<\epsilon _1\epsilon _2\Rightarrow min(\delta _1,\delta _2)>|t-c|>0$$
I could wave my hands and say that a well-behaved function approaches linearity in the neighborhood of ##c##, or something that sounds similarly impressive, but I am not satisfied with that. It seems my method of proof requires that any ##\delta < \delta _1## will also satisfy ##\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|<\epsilon _1##.
What justification, if any, have I for such an assertion? Again, this seems obvious for "well-behaved" functions, but I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg.
I acknowledge that my proof seems a bit frumpy, even if it works; but the question about ##\delta < \delta _1## remains.
$$\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|<\epsilon _1\Rightarrow \delta _1>|t-c|>0$$
and
$$\left|F_2 (t)-L_2\right|<\epsilon _2\Rightarrow \delta _2>|t-c|>0$$
$$\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|\left|F_2 (t)-L_2\right|<\epsilon _1\epsilon _2\Rightarrow min(\delta _1,\delta _2)>|t-c|>0$$
I could wave my hands and say that a well-behaved function approaches linearity in the neighborhood of ##c##, or something that sounds similarly impressive, but I am not satisfied with that. It seems my method of proof requires that any ##\delta < \delta _1## will also satisfy ##\left|F_1 (t)-L_1\right|<\epsilon _1##.
What justification, if any, have I for such an assertion? Again, this seems obvious for "well-behaved" functions, but I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg.
I acknowledge that my proof seems a bit frumpy, even if it works; but the question about ##\delta < \delta _1## remains.
Last edited: