Isolated points and continuity

  • Thread starter Thread starter dancergirlie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity Points
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the continuity of a function at an isolated point within its domain. The original poster is tasked with proving that a function f is continuous at an isolated point c in the set A, which is a subset of the real numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definition of continuity and the implications of c being an isolated point. There are discussions about the existence of limits and the conditions under which continuity can be established. Questions arise regarding the choice of delta and how it relates to the epsilon-delta definition of continuity.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on how to approach the proof, particularly regarding the selection of delta based on the definition of an isolated point. There is an ongoing exploration of how to articulate the proof for arbitrary epsilon values, with some participants clarifying misunderstandings about the implications of continuity at an isolated point.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the epsilon-delta definition of continuity, and participants are navigating the nuances of proving continuity when the limit does not exist in the conventional sense due to the isolated nature of point c.

dancergirlie
Messages
194
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let f : A --> R be a function, and let c in A be an isolated point of A. Prove that f
is continuous at c


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I'm kind of confused by this problem... if c is an isolated point, then the limit doesn't exist. So I can't really use the fact that a function is continuous at c if for all epsilon>0 there exists a delta>0 such that whenever |x-c|<delta, it follows that |f(x)-f(c)|<epsilon.

Any hints would be great!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi dancergirlie! :smile:

(have a delta: δ and an epsilon: ε :wink:)
dancergirlie said:
a function is continuous at c if for all epsilon>0 there exists a delta>0 such that whenever |x-c|<delta, it follows that |f(x)-f(c)|<epsilon.

How can that statement not be true? :wink:
 
Well it wouldn't be true for x=c. Because |x-c| would be equal to zero, and that contradicts the statement that delta is greater than zero.
 
I am assuming that A is a subset of the real numbers. Since c is an isolated point of A, there exists a \delta such that (c-\delta,c+\delta) contains no other points of A. Hint: that is your \delta to show that f is continuous at c. So now let x be in A and \varepsilon&gt;0. Then...
 
I am not sure how you are choosing delta... are you saying that you choose delta to be equal to the delta satisfying (c-delta, c+delta) containing no other points of A but c?
 
dancergirlie said:
I am not sure how you are choosing delta... are you saying that you choose delta to be equal to the delta satisfying (c-delta, c+delta) containing no other points of A but c?

Yes. That delta exists by the fact that c is an isolated point. Now just go through the epsilon-delta steps of proving f is continuous at c. Using that delta, what does |x-c|&lt;\delta imply if x is in A?
 
Would it just mean that x-c is in a as well?
Because I'm trying to show that
|f(x)-L|< epsilon, but there is no limit so that is why I'm getting confused...
 
dancergirlie said:
Would it just mean that x-c is in a as well?
Because I'm trying to show that
|f(x)-L|< epsilon, but there is no limit so that is why I'm getting confused...

Well your L is f(c). So you are trying to show that for x in A and any \varepsilon&gt;0, there is a \delta&gt;0 such that |x-c|&lt;\delta implies that |f(x)-f(c)|&lt;\varepsilon. But if x is in A and |x-c|&lt;\delta, where the delta is the one described above, then x can only be one point! And that point is ...?
 
dancergirlie said:
Well it wouldn't be true for x=c. Because |x-c| would be equal to zero, and that contradicts the statement that delta is greater than zero.

Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. :redface:

How does any of that answer the question, can the statement "a function is continuous at c if for all epsilon>0 there exists a delta>0 such that whenever |x-c|<delta, it follows that |f(x)-f(c)|<epsilon" be untrue?

Choose any ε … for example choose ε = 2009 …

can you find a δ that works for that ε? :smile:
 
  • #10
Wouldn't that mean that x has to be c? If it was then that contradicts the fact that it is continuous since that would mean that epsilon would=0 and delta=0, so the function wouldn't be continuous... but I'm trying to prove that it is continuous. I don't know if I m completely off here... but that is what I'm getting from what you're saying..
 
  • #11
[How does any of that answer the question, can the statement "a function is continuous at c if for all epsilon>0 there exists a delta>0 such that whenever |x-c|<delta, it follows that |f(x)-f(c)|<epsilon" be untrue?

Choose any ε … for example choose ε = 2009 …

I understand that I can find a delta for any specific epsilon, but how am I supposed to phrase that in my proof for an arbitrary epsilon?
 
  • #12
Yes, it would mean that x=c, but that does in no way imply that \varepsilon=0. Look. I'll just rewrite everything so hopefully it makes sense now.

Let c be an isolated point of A. Then there exists a \delta&gt;0 such that the interval (c-\delta,c+\delta) contains no other points of A besides c.

Let x be in A and \varepsilon&gt;0. Then |x-c|&lt;\delta implies that x is in the interval (c-\delta,c+\delta). This means x=c because there are no others points of A in that interval. This implies that |f(x)-f(c)|=|f(c)-f(c)|=0&lt;\varepsilon for absolutely any \varepsilon&gt;0 you choose. Therefore, f is continuous at c.
 
  • #13
Oh it makes sense, I was thinking that implied that epsilon equals zero, when it was just that |f(x)-f(c)|=0 which would be less than any epsilon greater than zero... thank you so much for your help, i really appreciate it!
 
  • #14
Good! No problem for the help. This problem is subtle, so I'm glad it makes sense now.
 
  • #15
dancergirlie said:
I understand that I can find a delta for any specific epsilon …

ok, then find it for ε = 2009 :smile:
… but how am I supposed to phrase that in my proof for an arbitrary epsilon?

well, for example, if you can use the same δ for every ε, that would do it, wouldn't it? :wink:
 
  • #16
Take \delta to be less than the distance from closest point in the domain of f other than c. There are no points in the domain of f such that 0&lt; |x-c|&lt; \delta so the hypothesis, "if 0&lt; |x-c&lt; \delta" is always false. If the hypothesis of a statement is false then the statement is _____.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K