How does the composition of functions prove this limit theorem?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wizzerdo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Theorem
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the limit theorem concerning the composition of functions, specifically Theorem 1. It establishes that if \( f: A \to \mathbb{R} \) and \( g: B \to A \) meet certain conditions—namely, the limits of \( g(t) \) as \( t \) approaches \( b \) equating to \( a \), the existence of a neighborhood \( Q \) where \( g(t) \neq a \), and the limit of \( f(x) \) as \( x \) approaches \( a \) equaling \( L \)—then the limit of the composition \( f \circ g \) at \( b \) is \( L \). The proof is straightforward by applying the definitions of limits and the given assumptions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limit definitions in calculus.
  • Familiarity with function composition.
  • Knowledge of accumulation points in topology.
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical proofs and logic.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definitions of limits in calculus, focusing on formal epsilon-delta definitions.
  • Explore the concept of function composition and its properties in real analysis.
  • Investigate accumulation points and their significance in topology.
  • Practice writing mathematical proofs, particularly in the context of limit theorems.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in advanced calculus or real analysis, particularly those focusing on limit theorems and function behavior.

wizzerdo
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Prove the following theorem about the limit of the composition of functions.
Theorem 1 Let f : A → R and g : B → A. Suppose a is an accumulation point of
A and b is an accumulation point of B and that

i. lim t→b g(t) = a;
ii. there is a neighborhood Q of b such that for t ∈ Q ∩ B, g(t) NOT equal to a;
iii. limx →a f (x) = L.
Then f ◦ g has limit L at b.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i think if you just write down the definitions of the limit, look at your assumptions, and restate them in terms of the definition, this proof will write itself.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K