Is this inverse function continuity proof consistent?

  • Thread starter pc2-brazil
  • Start date
  • #1
pc2-brazil
205
3
I am self-studying Calculus and tried to solve the following question:

Homework Statement


Suppose that the function f is continuous and increasing in the closed interval [a, b]. Then
(i) f has an inverse f-1, which is defined in [f(a), f(b)];
(ii) f-1 is increasing in [f(a), f(b)];
(iii) f-1 is continuous in [f(a), f(b)].
The book does the proofs for (i) and (ii). It then proofs (iii) partially by showing that f is continuous in the open interval (a,b).
I must then show that f-1 is continuous in f(a) to the right and continuous in f(b) to the left.

Homework Equations


Definition of unilateral limit to the right:
[tex]\lim_{x\to a^+} f(x) = L[/tex]
if and only if, for every small ε > 0, there is a δ > 0 such that
|f(x) - L| < ε whenever 0 < x - a < δ

The Attempt at a Solution


I will try to do here the proof that f-1 is continuous in f(a) to the right.
Applying the definition of unilateral limit to the right, I must then show that, for every small ε > 0, there is a δ > 0 such that
|f-1(y) - a| < ε whenever 0 < y - f(a) < δ

I begin by defining ε such that a + ε belongs to [f(a), f(b)].
Since a < a + ε, then, since f is increasing:
[tex]f(a) < f(a+\epsilon)[/tex]
Now, since the choice of δ depends upon the choice of ε, I choose δ such that:
[tex]\delta \leq f(a+\epsilon) - f(a)[/tex]
[tex]f(a)+\delta \leq f(a+\epsilon)[/tex]
Now, from the definition of the limit above, I know that:
[tex]0 < y - f(a) < \delta[/tex]
Summing f(a) to every term:
[tex]f(a) < y < f(a) + \delta[/tex]
So, combining this with the δ chosen above:
[tex]f(a) < y < f(a) + \delta \leq f(a+\epsilon)[/tex]
Since f and f-1 are both increasing:
[tex]f^{-1}(f(a)) < f^{-1}(y) < f^{-1}(f(a+\epsilon))[/tex]
[tex]a < f^{-1}(y) < a+\epsilon[/tex]
Subtracting a from every term:
[itex]0 < f^{-1}(y) - a < \epsilon[/itex] whenever [itex]0 < y - f(a) < \delta[/itex]
which appears to be the desired result, except for the lack of absolute value. I imagine the absolute value didn't appear here because [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is an increasing function.

Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
22,178
3,305
This looks ok to me!!

And indeed, you don't need that absolute value in the end because the function is monotone.
 

Suggested for: Is this inverse function continuity proof consistent?

Replies
0
Views
294
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
534
Replies
3
Views
143
  • Last Post
Replies
19
Views
203
Replies
12
Views
601
Replies
4
Views
377
Replies
8
Views
552
Replies
3
Views
302
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
649
Top