Limit Superior/Inferior

  • Thread starter kaosAD
  • Start date
  • #1
33
0
I have questions regarding this subject.

By definition, [tex]\limsup_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) \equiv \lim_{k \to \infty} \sup_{n \geq k} f(x_n)[/tex] and [tex]\liminf_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) \equiv \lim_{k \to \infty} \inf_{n \geq k} f(x_n)[/tex]. Say a sequence [tex]\{x_k\}[/tex] converging to [tex]0[/tex] from the left in the following example.

[tex]f(y) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
y + 1 & \quad ,y > 0 \\
y & \quad ,y \leq 0
\end{array}
\right.[/tex]

Then [tex]\limsup_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) = \liminf_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) = f(0)[/tex].

Suppose we have another sequence [tex]\{x_k\}[/tex] converging to [tex]0[/tex] from the right. Then [tex]\limsup_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) = \liminf_{k \to \infty} f(x_k) > f(0)[/tex].

What is the difference between [tex]\limsup_{k \to \infty} f(x_k)[/tex] and [tex]\liminf_{k \to \infty} f(x_k)[/tex]? I don't see any difference.
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,916
19
I'm very confused as to what you're actually doing.

Anyways, your function has an actual limit at [itex]+\infty[/itex]: in particular,

[tex]\lim_{y \rightarrow +\infty} f(y) = +\infty[/tex]

so of course the lim sup and lim inf are going to be equal.


I suspect you meant to take a one sided limit at zero.. but again, the function has an actual limit there:

[tex]\lim_{y \rightarrow 0^+} f(y) = 1[/tex]

so again, the lim sup and lim inf are going to be equal.



Oh, I think I've figured out what you're trying to do.

What you're forgetting is that

[tex]\limsup_{y \rightarrow 0} f(y)[/tex]

is the supremum over all sequences that converge to zero and for which [itex]f(x_k)[/itex] converges. So just picking a particular sequence and saying that the lim sup equals the limit of that sequence is wrong.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
33
0
Hurkyl said:
I'm very confused as to what you're actually doing.
Sorry for not explaining my problem clearer.

Hurkyl said:
Oh, I think I've figured out what you're trying to do.

What you're forgetting is that

[tex]\limsup_{y \rightarrow 0} f(y)[/tex]

is the supremum over all sequences that converge to zero and for which [itex]f(x_k)[/itex] converges. So just picking a particular sequence and saying that the lim sup equals the limit of that sequence is wrong.

That was what my problem was. Many thanks, Hurkyl! :)
Does this mean [itex]\lim_{k \to \infty} f(x_k)[/itex] is the limit over all sequences as well?

Also, using the given example, can I write [itex]0 \leq \lim_{x \to 0} f(x) \leq 1[/itex]? or that [itex]\lim_{x \to 0} f(x)[/itex] does not exist, so we cannot write down its range?
 
  • #4
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,916
19
You can't write that expression for the limit, because as you said, the limit is undefined.

You can say that all of the limit points are in that interval, though, because lim inf and lim sup are the minimum and maximum of the limit points.
 

Related Threads on Limit Superior/Inferior

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
5K
Top