Basic limit proof of limit equivalence

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the equivalence of two limit statements: that the limit of a function as x approaches c equals L if and only if the limit of the function as h approaches 0 equals L. The subject area is calculus, specifically focusing on limits and their properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to prove the limit equivalence by substituting x with c+h and questions the validity of this approach. Other participants discuss the correct direction of reasoning and the importance of starting with the appropriate assumptions regarding h.

Discussion Status

Participants are engaged in clarifying the steps necessary to prove the limit equivalence. Some guidance has been offered regarding the correct assumptions to make when proving each direction of the equivalence, and there is an ongoing exploration of the logical structure needed for a complete proof.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the need to prove both directions of the if-and-only-if statement, highlighting the complexity of the proof structure. Participants are navigating the nuances of limit definitions and the implications of their assumptions.

a_skier
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that limx\rightarrowcf(x)=L if and only if limh\rightarrow0f(x+h)=L.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I think this is a simple problem, but I am getting caught up in the middle, as I'm not sure if my procedure is a valid way to prove the statement.

Suppose limx\rightarrowcf(x)=L.

Then for each \epsilon>0 there is a \delta>0 so that

if |x-c|<\delta then |f(x)-L|<\epsilon.

Let x=c+h. Then if |x-c|<δ \Rightarrow |c+h-c|<δ \Rightarrow |h|<δ. Furthermore, |f(c+h)-L|<ε. And since we assumed limx\rightarrowcf(x)=L, it follows then that limh\rightarrow0f(c+h)=L.*

So my questions is this: it is valid to simply let x=c+h as I did?

*Note, I did not prove the other case, but I just wrote this out so you guys can get a good idea of what my argument is and tell me if it is wrong or not.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is the right approach, but your arrows don't point the way you want them to. To show that if h goes to zero, f(c+h) goes to L, you need to start with: if |h| < δ, things happen. You started by assuming that |x-c| < δ, then showed for your choice of defining h that |h| < δ as well, which isn't good enough. But all the stuff you wrote down is reversible, so you should be able to start with |h| < δ and then use what you know about f(x) when x=c+h.
 
Thank you very much Office_Shredder! One question though: I thought that I had to prove it in both orders, since it is an if and only if statement. Your route certainly seems more sensible but if I were to write the complete solution, wouldn't I assume in one case that as h goes to zero f(c+h) goes to f(c) and show that f(x) going to f(c) follows, and then start over and assume that as x goes to c f(x) goes to f(c) and show that f(c+h) going to f(c) follows from there? What I am asking is if I wanted to prove A iff B, wouldn't I do:

If A is true, then B follows.
If B is true, then A follows.

Thus, A is true iff B is true. ? (Hopefully that example makes more sense than the above).

Again, thank you!
 
Yes, but it's important to prove if A then B in the section where you are claiming if A then B. If you want to assume
\lim_{x\to c} f(x) = L
and then prove that
\lim_{h\to 0} f(c+h) = L,
then you better at some point have h be an arbitrary number such that |h| < δ
 
Ohhhhh! I see. Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K