Evaluating the Limit of f(x,y) at (0,y')

  • Thread starter Thread starter Benny
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on evaluating the limit of the piecewise function f(x,y) as (x,y) approaches (0,y'), where y' is negative. It is established that the limit approaches zero when approaching from the half-plane where x is less than or equal to zero. However, when approaching from the half-plane where x is greater than zero, the limit diverges to infinity, indicating a discontinuity at points (0,y') for negative y values. The analysis shows that the limit does not equal f(0,0) = 0, confirming that the function is not continuous at these points. Overall, the limit behavior varies significantly based on the path taken towards (0,y').
Benny
Messages
577
Reaction score
0
I've been doing some revision and I came across a question which boils down to deciding whether or not the following limit is equal to f(0,0) = 0.

The function is:

<br /> f(x,y) = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> {x^y ,x &gt; 0} \\<br /> {0,otherwise} \\<br /> \end{array}} \right.<br />

The limit is:

<br /> \mathop {\lim }\limits_{\left( {x,y} \right) - &gt; \left( {0,y&#039;} \right)} f(x,y) = L<br />

where L is either undefined, or defined - I don't know yet and y'(y-prime or y-dash) is a negative number. Approaching (x,y') along any path in the half-plane x <= 0 gives a limit of zero which is fairly obvious. Just looking at the definition of the function I think that the only points which may be discontinuous are (0,y') where y is a negative number.

I can think of a fudge method to 'show' that the function diverges to infinity if I approach (0,y') from the half plane x > 0(where f(x,y) = x^y) but that obviously isn't sufficient. So I'm hoping that someone can explain to me how to take evaluate the limit(if it exists) of f(x,y) as (x,y) -> (0,y') where y' is a negative number. So for instance how would I evaluate the limit of f(x,y) as (x,y) approaches (0,-5)? I mean, from the half plane x <= 0 the limit is just zero, but what about from the half plane x > 0(where f(x,y) = x^y)? Any assistance would be good, thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
if you're looking for limes of (x,y) to (0,y') then your function is still x^y. make that x^y'. y' is a negative number so you have 1/(x^y). As x -> 0 x^y grows infinitely small, so the whole term 1/(x^y) goes towards infinity. Um... does that help at all?
 
Check the behavior of f(x,0) as x goes to 0.
 
Thanks for the help so far but could you please give me further assistance?

f(x,0) is equal to one as I go from very large positive values of x to very small positive values of x. So it seems that I can say f(x,y) has a limit of one if (x,y) -> (0,0). Since this limit is not equal to f(0,0) = 0(by definition of the function) then it is not continuous as (0,0). However, I'm still having trouble dealing with negative y-values. I'm just unsure about how to deal with such values.

Actually, f(x,y) is a piecewise function so in taking limits along a path(say for instance y = x) which 'part' of the function should I consider? x^y or zero? There are other problems such as, if I take a limit along say y = x, would I only consider y = x for positive x since the function is split into two - half planes x > 0 and x <=0 and f(x,y) is defined differently in those planes.

Just looking at the graph of x^(b), where b is negative, seems to suggest that as (x,y) -> (0,b) of f(x,y) diverges. I'm not even sure if that is enough to suggest that f(x,y) doesn't converge to a finite value as (x,y) -> (0,b) where b is negative. Perhaps even worse, even if that is true, I can't think of a mathematically 'formal' or 'correct' way of showing that it is indeed the case.

Edit: Hmm...x^y = e^{y\log \left( x \right)} = \frac{1}{{e^{ - y\log \left( x \right)} }}.

So as (x,y) -> (0,b) , where b is negative f(x,y) approaches something. If I take the limit along the line y = b then x^y -> infinity. I have shown that the limit of f(x,y) -> (0,b) along a single line does not equal f(0,0) = 0 so in this case that is sufficient to say that the function is not continuous at (0,b) where b is negative?
 
Last edited:
Benny:
Now go along f(0,y)=0 as y goes to 0. The limiting value along this particular path is obviously zero.

This shows the limit value does not exist at the origin, even if you restrict your attention solely to the function's behaviour in the 1.quadrant.
 
Thanks for the help arildno.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top