Constructing a Function g: R2→R Limiting x→a but not Limiting ||x||→||a||

  • Thread starter Thread starter renolovexoxo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
AI Thread Summary
To construct a function g: R²→R where lim x→a g(x) exists but lim ||x||→||a|| g(x) does not, consider a continuous, non-constant function that cannot be expressed solely in terms of the radial distance r = √(x²+y²). As x approaches a constant vector a, g(x) will converge to g(a), ensuring the limit exists. However, as ||x|| approaches ||a||, multiple paths in R² can lead to different values of g(x), causing the limit to fail. Simple non-constant functions often serve as suitable examples for this scenario. This highlights the distinction between pointwise limits and limits based on distance in the context of multivariable calculus.
renolovexoxo
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
I hope this is in the right place, it feels like calculus, but it's the last part of my analysis problem.

Construct an example where g: R2->R lim x->a g(x) exists but lim ||x||->||a|| g(x) does not exist

I'm having a very hard time coming up with something to put this together. I think this is my theory behind it, does anyone have any ideas on something that would work?

Specify a continuous functiong(x ⃗ )= g(x,y) on R^2, which is not constant, and which cannot be strictly written as a function of r = √(x^2+y^2 ). Then, the limit of g(x ⃗ ) as x ⃗ approaches a ⃗,a constant vector,will exist (and will equal g(a ⃗ ) ), but the limit of g(x ⃗ ) as |x ⃗ |approaches |a ⃗ | (a constant positive number) will not exist because x ⃗ can approach many different values in R2 (and still have|x ⃗ |approach |a ⃗ |), but the values that g(x ⃗ ) approach will be different.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Apart from constant functions, basically everything not too complicated works.
Write down the easiest non-constant function you can imagine, chances are good that it is an example you can use.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top