A question about limit superior for function

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zzzhhh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Limit
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 5K views
zzzhhh
Messages
39
Reaction score
1
It is well known that limit of function can be converted to limit of sequence. I wonder if it still holds for limit superior of function. This problem is formulated as follows: For function [tex]f:\mathbb R\rightarrow\mathbb R[/tex] and [tex]a\in\mathbb R[/tex], define [tex]{\lim\sup}\limits_{x\to a}f(x)[/tex] to be [tex]\inf\limits_{\delta>0}(\sup\limits_{0<|x-a|<\delta}f(x))[/tex]. Can we have [tex]{\lim\sup}\limits_{x\to a}f(x)=c[/tex] iff [tex]{\lim\sup}\limits_{n\to\infty}f(x_n)=c[/tex] for any sequence [tex]<x_n>[/tex] satisfying 1)[tex]x_n\in\mathbb R[/tex], 2)[tex]x_n\to a[/tex] and 3)[tex]x_n\ne a[/tex]. I have no idea how to prove it, can you help me? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathman said:
It is not true as you stated it. The limsup (x->a) ≤ c for any sequence and = c for at least one sequence.
I cannot understand your reply, could you please explain in more detail? Thanks.
 
A great example, I got it! Thank you!
My original intention is to try to establish the statement "both lim sup f(x) and lim inf f(x) exist and equal c (possibly [tex]\pm\infty[/tex]) iff lim f(x) exists and equals c" from analogical statement for sequence. But now this approach is not feasible. I then proved the above statement for functions by definition. Thank you again, mathman!
 
It is well known that limit of function can be converted to limit of sequenc

This is only true for functions that are continuous at the point. So it's not surprising that a limsup styled in the same manner would fail for a function that is everywhere discontinuous