Are These Functions Uniformly Continuous on Their Given Intervals?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
11 replies · 3K views
mariama1
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
determine if these functions are uniformly continuous ::


1- [tex]\ln x[/tex] on the interval (0,1)
2- [tex]\cos \ln x[/tex] on the interval (0,1)
3- [tex]x arctan x[/tex] on the interval (-infinty,infinty)
4- [tex]x^{2}\arctan x[/tex] on the interval (infinty,0

5- [tex]\frac{x}{x-1}-\frac{1}{\ln x}[/tex] on the interval (0,1)



Please help me .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start with the definitions. What does it mean for a function to be uniformly continuous?
 
1- the first one if we find f`(x) = 1\x
and if we find the lim when x goes to 0 , then the limit does not exist
So , the function is not uniformly cont. on this interval
right ?
but how can i solve the next one ?
 
The property of uniform continuity is:

A function [tex]f :A \rightarrow R[/tex] is uniformly continuous is
[tex]\forall \varepsilon >0, \exists \delta >0: \forall x_1,x_2 \in A, |x_1-x_2|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x_1)-f(x_2)|<\varepsilon[/tex]

This means that for every interval of length [tex]2\varepsilon[/tex] in the image of f it is always possible to chose a good interval in A of length [tex]2\delta[/tex] so that the square resulting from the combination of those segments contains a "piece" of the function within the upper and lower sides of the rectangle. The choice of [tex]\varepsilon[/tex] is arbitrary, while [tex]\delta[/tex] depends on it.
I just wrote down these ideas to check out if they are correct.2)
[tex]cos(ln\,x)[/tex] in [tex](0,1)[/tex]
As [tex]x \rightarrow 0[/tex] the logarithm increases its slope and tends to [tex]-\infty[/tex]. Meanwhile the cosine continuously changes between the maximum and minimum values, +1 and -1. Actually going to 1, [tex]ln(x)\rightarrow 0[/tex] and [tex]cos[ln(x)]\rightarrow 1[/tex].

A more formal explanation is:
[tex]|cos[ln(x_1)]-cos[ln(x_2)]|[/tex]
[tex]=|-2sin\frac{ln(x_1)-ln(x_2)}{2}sin\frac{ln(x_1)+ln(x_2)}{2}|[/tex]

[tex]\leq 2|sin{\frac{ln(x_1)-ln(x_2)}{2}}|[/tex]

[tex]\leq |ln(x_1)-ln(x_2)|[/tex]Now the problem is reduced to show that it is impossible to have such a difference [tex]0<|ln(x_1)-ln(x_2)|<\varepsilon[/tex] can always correspond to an interval [tex]\delta[/tex] in A made small or big anyway, since ln(x) diverges as it approaches 0+. So the function is not uniformly continuous in (0,1).
Is this reasoning correct?
 
3)
[tex]f(x)=x \,arctg(x)[/tex]
Well, I think the work is more or less the same...
Let's take [tex]x_1,x_2 \in R[/tex] so that
[tex]|x_1\,arctg(x_1)-x_2\, arctg(x_2)|\leq \pi|x_1-x_2|\leq \varepsilon[/tex]
So we can take whatever x1,x2 , have the inequality above for [tex]\varepsilon \geq \pi |x_1-x_2|[/tex] and take our [tex]|x_1-x_2|\leq \delta[/tex]
with [tex]\delta \leq \varepsilon[\tex].<br /> It seems the function is uniformly continuous.[/tex]
 
Stardust* said:
3)
[tex]f(x)=x \,arctg(x)[/tex]
Well, I think the work is more or less the same...
Let's take [tex]x_1,x_2 \in R[/tex] so that
[tex]|x_1\,arctg(x_1)-x_2\, arctg(x_2)|\leq \pi|x_1-x_2|\leq \varepsilon[/tex]
So we can take whatever x1,x2 , have the inequality above for [tex]\varepsilon \geq \pi |x_1-x_2|[/tex] and take our [tex]|x_1-x_2|\leq \delta[/tex]
with [tex]\delta \leq \varepsilon[\tex].<br /> It seems the function is uniformly continuous.[/tex]
[tex] <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Thanks <br /> Yes , i think you proof is right <br /> because x arctan x seems to be uniformly cont. because it is bounded between 90, -90<br /> <br /> but about cos ln x , if we take the limit of f`(X) = - sin 1\x <br /> the limit when x goes to 0 does not exist . <br /> i think it is enoygh to prove that this function is not uniformly cont. <br /> Right ? <br /> <br /> and what about Q4 ??[/tex]
 
Now a proposal of solution for 4:
Let's keep [tex]\varepsilon\geq 0[/tex] fixed and choose [tex]x_1,x_2 \in R[/tex] so that:
[tex]0<x_1<x_2=x_1+\delta /2[/tex]

The variation in the 'height' of the function between the two points is:
[tex]|f(x_1)-f(x_2)|=|x_1^2arctg(x_1)-x_2^2arctg(x_2)|\leq |\pi(x_1^2-x_2^2)|=\pi|x_1\delta+\delta ^2 /4|[/tex]
but this last quantity is always:
[tex]\pi|x_1\delta+\delta ^2 /4|\geq|x_1\delta|[/tex].
So we have three conditions
a)[tex]|x_1-x_2|<\delta[/tex]
b)[tex]|x_1^2arctg(x_1)-x_2^2arctg(x_2)|<\varepsilon[/tex]
c)[tex]|x_1^2arctg(x_1)-x_2^2arctg(x_2)|\geq x_1 \delta[/tex]

(a, b derive from the definition of uniform continuity, while c is the result of the previous passages) How can we get to a contraddiction? I believe this is possible by showing that
[tex]|x_1^2arctg(x_1)-x_2^2arctg(x_2)[/tex] can be both bigger and smaller than the chosen [tex]\varepsilon[/tex] at the same time, for the same x1. This is possible if we use [tex]\varepsilon >x_1 \delta[/tex]. The only way out from this situation is to admit f cannot be uniformly continuous.
I hope this last passage is correct, but I still have some doubt. Any idea to improve it?


Anyway, for exercise 2):
the fact the derivative doesn not exists [many physicists I know would better say "it explodes" :-) ] only tells us that the function is not Lipschitzian. f being Lipschtizian means f being uniformly continuous, but I don't think the inverse is so sure. Indeed, at least a fractal function I saw this week looked very uniformly continuous, but not lipschitzian...
 
Now, I think there's something wrong in what I said for 4).
I'll try again.

So we have:
[tex]f(x)=x^2 arctg(x)=x^2 \cdot h(x)[/tex]
Let's consider two points:
[tex]x_1,x_2 \in [0,\infty]\, , \,x_2<x_1\, , \, x_1=x_2+\omega[/tex], where [tex]\omega>0[/tex].

We get to:
[tex]\left|(x_2+\omega)^2 h(x)-x_2h(x)\right|=\left|x_2^2[h(x_2+\omega)-h(x_2)]+2x_2\omega h(x_2+\omega)+\omega^2 h(x_2+\omega)\right|[/tex](*)
Looking at [tex]y=x^2[/tex], it is clear it is strictly increasing in the interval [tex][0, \infty][/tex];
[tex]y=arctg(x)=h(x)[/tex] is strictly increasing too. So the quantity in (*) is always positive since all the pieces of the sum are positive. This means we can always take [tex]x_2[/tex] big enough to make it greater than an arbitrary value [tex]M>\varepsilon \in R[/tex]
[tex][/tex]
[tex][/tex]
[tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
The last part of my previous post is:
Looking at [tex]y=x^2[/tex], it is clear it is strictly increasing in the interval [tex][0, \infty][/tex];
[tex]y=arctg(x)=h(x)[/tex] is strictly increasing too. So the quantity in (*) is always positive since all the pieces of the sum are positive. This means we can always take [tex]x_2[/tex] big enough to make it greater than an arbitrary value [tex]M>\varepsilon \in R[/tex], so this difference (*) is not as small as necessary to say [tex]f(x)[/tex] is uniformly continuous.
 
Stardust* said:
The last part of my previous post is:
Looking at [tex]y=x^2[/tex], it is clear it is strictly increasing in the interval [tex][0, \infty][/tex];
[tex]y=arctg(x)=h(x)[/tex] is strictly increasing too. So the quantity in (*) is always positive since all the pieces of the sum are positive. This means we can always take [tex]x_2[/tex] big enough to make it greater than an arbitrary value [tex]M>\varepsilon \in R[/tex], so this difference (*) is not as small as necessary to say [tex]f(x)[/tex] is uniformly continuous.

Thanks for your notes , but the f(x) seems to be not uniformly continuous , but I am not sure
 
micromass said:
But it's actually against PF policy to give complete solutions to homework problems. Since the OP will only learn this things if he figures it out himself...
I'm sorry, I did not want to annoy anyone, I was just trying to see if I could give a hand and if I could solve such exercises in a more or less correct way (these are the first ones of this kind I do, so this is good practice for me, too).
I'll be more careful in future...




mariama1 said:
Thanks for your notes , but the f(x) seems to be not uniformly continuous , but I am not sure
Yes, I guess so. Probably I expressed myself in a not clear way, this is what I mean by saying you can make the difference (*) big as you want, while you need it to be small.

For 5) , I still have no clues. Any idea?