A constant can be moved through limit sign-any intuitive way to understand this?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Juwane
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Limit
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A constant can be moved through the limit sign based on the theorem that states the limit of a product equals the product of the limits. Specifically, for the expression limx → a c f(x), where c is a constant, it can be shown that limx → a c f(x) = c limx → a f(x). This holds true for any non-zero constant c, and if c = 0, the limit evaluates to zero. The discussion emphasizes the intuitive understanding of this concept through the definition of limits and the properties of constants in calculus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with the properties of limits
  • Basic knowledge of functions and constants
  • Concept of epsilon-delta definitions of limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the epsilon-delta definition of limits in detail
  • Explore the properties of limits, particularly the limit of a product
  • Learn about l'Hôpital's Rule and its applications
  • Investigate graphical interpretations of limits and continuity
USEFUL FOR

Students of calculus, mathematics educators, and anyone seeking a deeper understanding of limit properties and their applications in analysis.

Juwane
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
A constant can be moved through limit sign--any intuitive way to understand this?

We know that a constant can be moved through limit sign. However, according to my understanding, this result follows from the theorem that the limit of a product is equal to the product of the limits, and when one of the multiplicand of the product is a constant, then if we take the limit of the constant, it will equal to the constant itself.

But is there an intuitive or graphical way of showing that a constant can be moved through a limit sign?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Suppose we were considering the following:
[tex] lim_{x \rightarrow a} \ c f(x)[/tex]
Where c is a constant.

Then, we can agree that
[tex] c f(x) = \underbrace{f(x) + f(x) + ... + f(x)}_{c}[/tex]

Thus,
[tex] lim_{x \rightarrow a} \ c f(x) = lim_{x \rightarrow a} \underbrace{f(x) + f(x) + ... + f(x)}_{c}[/tex]

Would you be willing to believe the sum of the limits is the limit of the sum? If so, we're done.
 


l'Hôpital, are you asserting that this is only true if c is a positive integer? That's the only case in which
[tex]c f(x) = \underbrace{f(x) + f(x) + ... + f(x)}_{c}[/tex]

(Added- Ah, I see, Juwant asked for an "intuitive" way of seeing it.)

From the definition of "limit":
If [itex]\lim_{x\to a} cf(x)= L[/itex], c a (non zero) constant, then given any [itex]\epsilon> 0[/itex], there exist [itex]\delta> 0[/itex] such that if [itex]|x-a|<\delta[/itex], then [itex]|cf(x)- L|< \epsilon[/itex]. Therefore, given any [itex]\epsilon> 0[/itex], [itex]|c|\epsilon[/itex] is also greater than 0 and there exist [itex]\delta> 0[/itex] such that if [itex]|x- a|< \delta[/itex], [itex]|cf(x)- L|< |c|\epsilon[/itex]. Now, [itex]|c||f(x)- L/c|< |c|\epsilon[/itex] so [itex]|f(x)- L/c|< \epsilon[/itex] so [itex]\lim_{x\to a} f(x)= L/c[/itex].

That is, if [itex]\lim_{x\to a} cf(x)= L[/itex], then [itex]\lim_{x\to a}f(x)= L/c[/itex] which is the same as [itex]c \lim_{x\to a}f(x)= L[/itex].

If c= 0, then cf(x)= 0 for all x so [itex]\lim_{x\to a} cf(x)= 0= 0(\lim_{x\to a} f(x))[/itex] as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K