Can anybody explain this to me? (Analysis)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Artusartos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis Explain
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the uniform convergence of the sequence of functions f_n(x) = x/n on the interval [0,1]. Participants are examining the validity of a proof claiming that f_n converges uniformly to the limit function f(x) = 0.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the inequalities used in the proof, particularly why |x/n| is less than or equal to 1/(nε) and the implications of ε being less than 1. There are also inquiries about the choice of N = 1/ε and its relevance to uniform convergence.

Discussion Status

Some participants express skepticism about the proof's validity, suggesting it is flawed. Others propose alternative reasoning and bounds to support the claim of uniform convergence, indicating a mix of interpretations and approaches being explored.

Contextual Notes

There are references to external materials and solutions that participants are critiquing, highlighting potential discrepancies in the provided proofs and the need for careful examination of assumptions and definitions in the context of uniform convergence.

Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
For x in [0, infinity), let [itex]f_n(x)= \frac{x}{n}[/itex]...

Determine whether [itex]f_n[/itex] converges uniformly to f (the limit, which is equal to 0) on [0,1].

Answer:

Let [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] be given. Let [itex]N= \frac{1}{\epsilon}[/itex]. Then for n>N, [itex]| f_n(x) - 0 | = | \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1/ \epsilon}{n} = \frac{1}{n \epsilon} < \epsilon[/itex] as desired.

My questions:

1) Why is [itex]| \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1/ \epsilon}{n}[/itex]? How do we know that x is less than 1 over epsilon?

2) Why is [itex]\frac{1}{n \epsilon} < \epsilon[/itex]?

3) Finally, how did they know that N was supposed to be 1/epsilon?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This "proof" is false.This sequence does not converge uniformly in that interval,because the suprimum for x is not final so certainly does not converge to 0.
 
hedipaldi said:
This "proof" is false.This sequence does not converge uniformly in that interval,because the suprimum for x is not final so certainly does not converge to 0.


But this answer is from here (page 49, exercise 24.2 b)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/70434268/Ross-Solutions
 
hedipaldi said:
This "proof" is false.This sequence does not converge uniformly in that interval,because the suprimum for x is not final so certainly does not converge to 0.

I don't know what you mean by "not final". Since the sequence converges, it MUST converge uniformly on any closed and bounded (i.e. compact) interval.
 
Artusartos said:
But this answer is from here (page 49, exercise 24.2 b)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/70434268/Ross-Solutions

(I assume you mean page 47.) The proof for part (b) says "Claim: [itex]f_n \rightarrow f[/itex] uniformly on [0,1]." Part (c) shows by contradiction that it is not true on [itex][0,\infty)[/itex].

I am not sure which part you are trying to solve:

Artusartos said:
For x in [0, infinity), let [itex]f_n(x)= \frac{x}{n}[/itex]...

Determine whether [itex]f_n[/itex] converges uniformly to f (the limit, which is equal to 0) on [0,1].
 
jbunniii said:
(I assume you mean page 47.) The proof for part (b) says "Claim: [itex]f_n \rightarrow f[/itex] uniformly on [0,1]." Part (c) shows by contradiction that it is not true on [itex][0,\infty)[/itex].

I am not sure which part you are trying to solve:

I was actually talking about part (b)...about why it converges uniformly on [0,1].
 
Oops! I misread the problem.
 
I read through the proof at your link, and it's a mess. My comments below:

Artusartos said:
For x in [0, infinity), let [itex]f_n(x)= \frac{x}{n}[/itex]...

Determine whether [itex]f_n[/itex] converges uniformly to f (the limit, which is equal to 0) on [0,1].

Answer:

Let [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] be given. Let [itex]N= \frac{1}{\epsilon}[/itex]. Then for n>N, [itex]| f_n(x) - 0 | = | \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1/ \epsilon}{n} = \frac{1}{n \epsilon} < \epsilon[/itex] as desired.

My questions:

1) Why is [itex]| \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1/ \epsilon}{n}[/itex]? How do we know that x is less than 1 over epsilon?
In general, it's not true. All you know is that [itex]0 \leq x \leq 1[/itex]. If [itex]0 < \epsilon < 1[/itex] (assumption not stated in the proof), then [itex]x \leq 1 < 1/\epsilon[/itex].

2) Why is [itex]\frac{1}{n \epsilon} < \epsilon[/itex]?
This is certainly not true. Take [itex]\epsilon = 1/10[/itex], [itex]N = 10[/itex], and [itex]n = 11[/itex]. Then
[tex]\frac{1}{n \epsilon} = \frac{1}{11 /10} = \frac{10}{11}[/tex]
which is certainly not less than 1/10.

I suggest ignoring that "solution" altogether. The statement is true, but the proof is bogus.
 
I suggest starting with
[tex]|f(x) - 0| = \left|\frac{x}{n}\right| \leq \left|\frac{1}{n}\right| \ldots[/tex]
where the inequality is true because [itex]|x| \leq 1[/itex].
 
  • #10
jbunniii said:
I read through the proof at your link, and it's a mess. My comments below:


In general, it's not true. All you know is that [itex]0 \leq x \leq 1[/itex]. If [itex]0 < \epsilon < 1[/itex] (assumption not stated in the proof), then [itex]x \leq 1 < 1/\epsilon[/itex].


This is certainly not true. Take [itex]\epsilon = 1/10[/itex], [itex]N = 10[/itex], and [itex]n = 11[/itex]. Then
[tex]\frac{1}{n \epsilon} = \frac{1}{11 /10} = \frac{10}{11}[/tex]
which is certainly not less than 1/10.

I suggest ignoring that "solution" altogether. The statement is true, but the proof is bogus.


So can I prove it like this?

[itex]| f_n(x) - 0| = | \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1}{n}[/itex]

So when is 1/n equal to epsilon? It is when n=1/epsilon...so n needs to be greater than 1/epsilon. Do you think my answer is correct?
 
  • #11
Artusartos said:
So can I prove it like this?

[itex]| f_n(x) - 0| = | \frac{x}{n} | \leq \frac{1}{n}[/itex]

So when is 1/n equal to epsilon? It is when n=1/epsilon...so n needs to be greater than 1/epsilon. Do you think my answer is correct?

Yes, if [itex]n > 1/\epsilon[/itex], then [itex]1/n < \epsilon[/itex], which is what you need. The key is that this choice of [itex]n[/itex] works for any [itex]x \in [0,1][/itex].
 
  • #12
jbunniii said:
Yes, if [itex]n > 1/\epsilon[/itex], then [itex]1/n < \epsilon[/itex], which is what you need. The key is that this choice of [itex]n[/itex] works for any [itex]x \in [0,1][/itex].

Thanks a lot. I also have another question, if you don't mind...

From the same link that I gave...for exercise 24.6 (b), we are asked if f_n converges uniformly on [0,1]. And the solution (in the link) says that [itex]| \frac{1-2xn}{n^2} | \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}[/itex]. I wasn't able to understand why that is true...
 
  • #13
Artusartos said:
Thanks a lot. I also have another question, if you don't mind...

From the same link that I gave...for exercise 24.6 (b), we are asked if f_n converges uniformly on [0,1]. And the solution (in the link) says that [itex]| \frac{1-2xn}{n^2} | \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}[/itex]. I wasn't able to understand why that is true...
That's because it is false. Consider [itex]x = 1[/itex], [itex]n = 2[/itex]. Then
[tex]\left|\frac{1 - 2xn}{n^2}\right| = \left|\frac{1-4}{4}\right| = \frac{3}{4}[/tex]
which is not less than [itex]1/\sqrt{2} \approx 0.7071[/itex].

Whoever wrote the solution manual you are using is just plain wrong.

You can obtain a bound that will work as follows:
[tex]|1 - 2xn| \leq |1| + |2xn| = 1 + 2n|x| \leq 1 + 2n \leq n + 2n = 3n[/tex]
Try using this to solve the problem. You'll have to use a different N from what the solution chose, but it should work.
 
  • #14
jbunniii said:
That's because it is false. Consider [itex]x = 1[/itex], [itex]n = 2[/itex]. Then
[tex]\left|\frac{1 - 2xn}{n^2}\right| = \left|\frac{1-4}{4}\right| = \frac{3}{4}[/tex]
which is not less than [itex]1/\sqrt{2} \approx 0.7071[/itex].

Whoever wrote the solution manual you are using is just plain wrong.

You can obtain a bound that will work as follows:
[tex]|1 - 2xn| \leq |1| + |2xn| = 1 + 2n|x| \leq 1 + 2n \leq n + 2n = 3n[/tex]
Try using this to solve the problem. You'll have to use a different N from what the solution chose, but it should work.



Thanks a lot :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K