If f is continuous at c and f(c)>1

  • Thread starter Thread starter H2Pendragon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuous
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a proof involving the continuity of a function f at a point c, where it is given that f(c) > 1. The goal is to demonstrate the existence of a radius r such that for all x within a certain neighborhood of c, f(x) remains greater than 1.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of continuity and the limit definition, questioning how to apply these concepts to show that f(x) > 1 in the neighborhood of c. Some suggest using specific values for f(c) to explore the conditions under which f(x) remains above 1.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of different approaches to the proof, with some participants offering specific examples and others questioning the reasoning behind choosing epsilon and r. A few have proposed using a contradiction or specific forms of f(c) to guide their reasoning, but no consensus has been reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of articulating the proof in words rather than through graphical representation, as well as the potential complications arising from c being an isolated point.

H2Pendragon
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hi everyone, this is probably an easy question but I'm having trouble on the wording of the proof.

Let f be continuous at x=c and f(c) > 1

Show that there exists an r > 0 such that \forall x \in B(c,r) \bigcap D : f(x) > 1

Homework Equations



\forall \epsilon > 0, \exists r > 0, \forall x \in B(c,r) \bigcap D \Rightarrow |f(x) - f(c)| < \epsilon

f(c) > 1

The Attempt at a Solution



I'd put something here but I don't really have any attempts. I originally thought of using the limit rule that lim f(x) = f(c) but that doesn't work since c could be an isolated point.

If I used a graph it just seems so obvious, but I have to use words to prove it. I tried also to use a contradiction, but using just what I put down in (2) didn't lead to any direct contradiction that I could see.

A nudge in the right direction would be helpful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If in doubt try an example.

Let's say for the sake of argument that f(c)=2. What choice of epsilon, and r, from 2. above will mean that f(x) > 1 in the ball around c?
 
-e<f(x)-f(c)<e
f(x)>f(c)-e
f(c)=1+h^2 for some h real, do you understand how to pick e such that f(x)>1.
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
-e<f(x)-f(c)<e
f(x)>f(c)-e
f(c)=1+h^2 for some h real, do you understand how to pick e such that f(x)>1.

by this reasoning couldn't I just claim that f(c) = 1 + e?
 
Yes, you can do that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K