Graphing Real Functions: Limits at Infinity and Complex Numbers Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jadenag
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on graphing real functions and understanding limits at infinity. Participants are trying to determine the correct shapes of graphs for specific functions, with one user noting a "C-shaped" graph and another expressing confusion about a "stair step" pattern. The conversation also addresses the concept of limits, clarifying that if a function has different directional limits at positive and negative infinity, the overall limit does not exist. Additionally, there is a mention of a typographical error in the problem statement that could lead to further confusion. The main takeaway emphasizes the importance of accurately interpreting functions and limits in real analysis.
Jadenag
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
dcvg45.jpg


We have to graph these functions where they are real. (no need to graph where complex)

d)
For d I am getting a point at (1,0) and then half a c shaped graph opening towards the right. Is
this correct?
g)
For g I have 0 on the negative side. and a straight line in the first quadrant. :s I am not sure about this one.


ina420.png

I have to find the limit.
I realize this has two different directional limits positive and negative infinity. does that mean the actual limit does not exist?

30tnhg2.jpg


Is this very easy? I mean iim confused do i simply have to plug in underroot etc or is it something much more complicated :S
 

Attachments

  • dcvg45.jpg
    dcvg45.jpg
    4.5 KB · Views: 318
  • ina420.png
    ina420.png
    3 KB · Views: 407
Physics news on Phys.org
Jadenag said:
dcvg45.jpg


We have to graph these functions where they are real. (no need to graph where complex)

d)
For d I am getting a point at (1,0) and then half a c shaped graph opening towards the right. Is
this correct?
Half correct. What about t<1?

g)
For g I have 0 on the negative side. and a straight line in the first quadrant. :s I am not sure about this one.
No, that is not correct. You should have a "stair step". If x is between 0 and 1, n= 0 so the value of the function is 0. For x between 1 and 2, n= 1 so the value of the function is 1. If x is between 2 and 3, n= 2 so the value of the function is 2, etc.\

ina420.png

I have to find the limit.
I realize this has two different directional limits positive and negative infinity. does that mean the actual limit does not exist?
Yes, any time you have a fraction where the denominator goes to 0 and the numerator does not, the limit does not exist.

30tnhg2.jpg


Is this very easy? I mean iim confused do i simply have to plug in underroot etc or is it something much more complicated :S
It looks to me like there is a serious typographical error in this problem! The point of the exercise is to show that, as x gets closer and closer to 2, f(x) gets closer and closer to 4 and then show that you can use the same argument with the general \epsilon as you did with .01 and .001.

(a) asks "What is the value of x_1 such that f(x)= 2+ 0.01". That obviously should be "f(x)= 4+ 0.01"! And (b) should be " "What is the value of x_1 such that f(x)= 4- 0.01". f(x)= 4+ 0.01 is the same as x^2= 4.01. Find x_1 by taking the square root of both sides.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K