Basic epsilon and delta proofs, limits, quick questions.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the limit of the expression lim h→0 (R(h)/||h||) in ℝ2, specifically analyzing whether this limit equals zero. The user explores the epsilon-delta definition of limits, concluding that the limit does not exist due to the behavior of the denominator, ||h||, approaching zero, which causes the expression to become arbitrarily large. The user seeks clarification on the dependence of δ on h1 and h2, ultimately confirming that δ can depend on ε but not on the specific values of h1 and h2.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of epsilon-delta definitions of limits
  • Familiarity with vector norms in ℝ2
  • Basic knowledge of calculus and limits
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic expressions involving limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the epsilon-delta definition of limits in more depth
  • Learn about the behavior of functions as they approach infinity
  • Explore examples of limits that do not exist in multivariable calculus
  • Investigate the implications of choosing δ based on ε in limit proofs
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in calculus, particularly those focusing on multivariable limits, as well as anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of epsilon-delta proofs and their applications in mathematical analysis.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
I am trying to check whether lim h→0 (R(h)/||h||) =0 or not.
I am working in ℝ2.
h=h1e1+h2e2**
=> ||h||=(h1^2+h2^2)^1/2

I am using the definition that (R(h)/||h||)<ε * whenever 0<|h|<δ for all h.

Example 1
(R(h)/||h||)=h1h2/(h1^2+h2^2)^3/2
I can see that the denominator dominates, so expect the limit not to exist, so in order to proove this explicitly/epsilon-delta method I look for a counter example.

I consider h1=h2. In which case I get:
(R(h)/||h||) = 1/[2^(3/2).||h||].

My problem... My book then says 'no matter how small δ is, there are therefore points with (R(h)/||h||)>ε, for every ε.'

I am don't understand this, first of all , because the expression involves 1/||h||, I thought we would be looking to increase δ to attain *<ε.
Secondly, why can't you simply take δ=1/[ε.2^(3/2)]?

Question 2
On concepts of the definition, I am confused as to whether δ can be a function of h1 and h2,as defined by **, as well as ε. I know that the definition must hold for all h, so intuitively no, but aren't h1 and h2 completely arbitary?

Many thanks for anyone who can shed some light on this, greatly appreciated :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
binbagsss said:
I am don't understand this, first of all , because the expression involves 1/||h||, I thought we would be looking to increase δ to attain *<ε.
Secondly, why can't you simply take δ=1/[ε.2^(3/2)]?
As ##h## approaches zero, ##\|h\|## also approaches zero, so ##1/\|h\|## becomes arbitrarily large: it certainly does not approach zero.

To state this more explicitly, choose any ##\epsilon > 0##. Now ##1/\|h\| > \epsilon## whenever ##\|h\| < 1/\epsilon##. This is exactly the opposite of what would happen if the limit was zero!

Question 2
On concepts of the definition, I am confused as to whether δ can be a function of h1 and h2,as defined by **, as well as ε. I know that the definition must hold for all h, so intuitively no, but aren't h1 and h2 completely arbitary?
No, the ##\delta## can depend on ##\epsilon## but not on ##h_1## and ##h_2##. Given ##\epsilon##, you need to find a ##\delta## such that ##|R(h)/\|h\|| < \epsilon## for all ##h_1## and ##h_2## that satisfy ##0 < \sqrt{h_1^2 + h_2^2} < \delta##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K