Evaluating Limits: frac() Homework Statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saitama
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits
Saitama
Messages
4,244
Reaction score
93

Homework Statement


\lim_{x→1}(frac(x)+frac(-x))

frac() is the fractional part function.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I tried it by graphing.
Firstly i drew the graph of frac(x) and then frac(-x). I added them. The resulting graph was constant at 1 but discontinuous at integers. So the answer to the question is 1 but wolfram gave me the answer to be 0. :(
I don't understand where i am wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If 0 < x < 1 then -1 < -x < 0 and frac(x) = x and frac (-x) = 1 - x . So, what is frac(x) + frac(-x) ?

Do similar for 1 < x < 2 .
 
When 0<x<1, frac(x)+frac(-x)=1.
When 1<x<2, then -2<-x<-1.
frac(x)=x-1 and frac(-x)=2-x.
Therefore, frac(x)+frac(-x)=1. :)

But how would it help me to solve the problem?
 
When find the limit as x → 1, there is no need to be concerned about the value of the function at x=1, just be concerned about x approaching 1 from each side , and whether or not the function approaches the same value from either side.

Although, I am having second thoughts about whether I have frac(x) correct for negative numbers.
 
SammyS said:
When find the limit as x → 1, there is no need to be concerned about the value of the function at x=1, just be concerned about x approaching 1 from each side , and whether or not the function approaches the same value from either side.

Although, I am having second thoughts about whether I have frac(x) correct for negative numbers.

Thanks for your help Sammy. :)
I have figured it out where i was wrong. I did a mistake in graphing and adding them.
Now my answer comes to be correct. :)
 
Do you think that this graph is correct? For frac(x)
Wolfram gives me this:-
[PLAIN]http://www3.wolframalpha.com/Calculate/MSP/MSP115319hcd32f187c18df000050fghaaf173h217b?MSPStoreType=image/gif&s=25&w=319&h=133&cdf=Coordinates&cdf=Tooltips
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pranav-Arora said:
Do you think that this graph is correct? For frac(x)
Wolfram gives me this:-
[PLAIN]http://www3.wolframalpha.com/Calculate/MSP/MSP115319hcd32f187c18df000050fghaaf173h217b?MSPStoreType=image/gif&s=25&w=319&h=133&cdf=Coordinates&cdf=Tooltips[/QUOTE]
That depends on the definition of the frac(x) function.

Where's my TI graphing calculator??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyS said:
That depends on the definition of the frac(x) function.

I don't get you. frac(x) means the fractional part.
One question:-
If the number is negative, for instance, -1.30, then the fractional part is 0.70.
Right..?

So why wolfram gives me that type of graph? At the negative side too it should go upwards.

Where's my TI graphing calculator??

Erm...what?
 
Bump :(
 
  • #11
So is there no fractional part of -1.30?
 
  • #12
Pranav-Arora said:
So is there no fractional part of -1.30?
There certainly is a fractional part of -1.30.

Is it 0.30? ... or 0.70 ? ... or -0.30 ?

I'm quite sure that for all of them, \lim_{x→1}(\text{frac}(x)+\text{frac}(-x)) exists, although the limit is not the same for them all.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
SammyS said:
There certainly is a fractional part of -1.30.

Is it 0.30? ... or 0.70 ? ... or -0.30 ?

I'm quite sure that for all of them, \lim_{x→1}(\text{frac}(x)+\text{frac}(-x)) exists, although the limit is not the same for them all.

I think its 0.70. :)
 
  • #14
Pranav-Arora said:
So is there no fractional part of -1.30?

You could see that different people define the fractional part of negative numbers in different ways. Look at your notes what definition of fractional part was taught to you.

ehild
 
  • #15
ehild said:
You could see that different people define the fractional part of negative numbers in different ways. Look at your notes what definition of fractional part was taught to you.

ehild

My notes says that if we have a negative number like -1.80, then the fractional part would be the (integer part +1)+(given negative number) i.e 0.20.
Here the integer part is 1 and 1+1=2 and 2-1.80=0.20.
 
  • #16
With the definition you learnt, you get always a positive number for the integer part. It is then the same SammyS suggested.
frac(A)=A-floor(A)
where floor(A) is the highest integer which is less than A.
You need to find the limit at x=1. Consider the cases x-->1+0 and when x-->1-0. It is enough to consider such x values for which |x-1|<1

You were right, the result is 1 with this definition.

ehild
 
  • #17
ehild said:
With the definition you learnt, you get always a positive number for the integer part. It is then the same SammyS suggested.
frac(A)=A-floor(A)
where floor(A) is the highest integer which is less than A.
You need to find the limit at x=1. Consider the cases x-->1+0 and when x-->1-0. It is enough to consider such x values for which |x-1|<1

You were right, the result is 1 with this definition.

ehild

Thanks for the explanation ehild but how do you get this:- |x-1|<1 ?
 
  • #18
Finding the limit of a function at A, it is enough to investigate such x values which are close to A. A=1 in your problem, so it is enough to investigate the function for such x values which are at distance less than 1 from A=1, that is 0< x <2, that is -1<x-1<1, which is equivalent to |x-1|<1.

ehild
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Back
Top