farleyknight
- 143
- 0
Hey all,
This isn't really homework, just looking through a particular book (Spivak's Calculus, 3rd ed) and trying to see if my understanding of a problem is clear or not.
Problem 9, page 107, for those of you following along at home.
Prove that:
[itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = \lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h)[/itex]
Now, the book gives the following answer:
Let [itex]l = \lim_{x \to a} f(x)[/itex] and define [itex]g(h) = f(a + h)[/itex]. Then for every [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] there is a [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that, for all x, if [itex]0 < |x - a| < \delta[/itex] then [itex]|f(x) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. Now, if [itex]0 < |h| < \delta[/itex] then [itex]0 < |(h + a) - a| < \delta[/itex] so [itex]|f(a + h) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. This inequality can be written [itex]|g(h) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. Thus [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} g(h) = l[/itex], which can be also written [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = l[/itex]. The same sort of argument shows that if [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = m[/itex], then [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = m[/itex]. So either limit exists if the other does, and in this case, they are equal.
Now it appears to me that the author is making the a priori assumption that:
[itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = L[/itex] and [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = L[/itex]
and using that in his proof to show the two are equal. But I'm doubtful this is a legitimate jump.
Let's do a different setup and I'll show you want I mean.
Given [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = L[/itex] and [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = M[/itex] , prove [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = \lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h)[/itex]
[itex]0 < |x - a| < \delta[/itex] implies [itex]|f(x) - L| < \epsilon[/itex]
Now if
[itex]0 < |h| < \delta[/itex] then
[itex]0 < |(h + a) - a| < \delta[/itex] implies [itex]|f(a + h) - M| < \epsilon[/itex]
Oh wait, we can't go any further.. The two are not necessarily equal because L might not equal M.
So I'm pretty sure the book is right and I'm wrong.. so what's the error in my logic?
- Rob
Homework Statement
This isn't really homework, just looking through a particular book (Spivak's Calculus, 3rd ed) and trying to see if my understanding of a problem is clear or not.
Problem 9, page 107, for those of you following along at home.
Prove that:
[itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = \lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h)[/itex]
Homework Equations
Now, the book gives the following answer:
Let [itex]l = \lim_{x \to a} f(x)[/itex] and define [itex]g(h) = f(a + h)[/itex]. Then for every [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] there is a [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that, for all x, if [itex]0 < |x - a| < \delta[/itex] then [itex]|f(x) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. Now, if [itex]0 < |h| < \delta[/itex] then [itex]0 < |(h + a) - a| < \delta[/itex] so [itex]|f(a + h) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. This inequality can be written [itex]|g(h) - l| < \epsilon[/itex]. Thus [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} g(h) = l[/itex], which can be also written [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = l[/itex]. The same sort of argument shows that if [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = m[/itex], then [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = m[/itex]. So either limit exists if the other does, and in this case, they are equal.
The Attempt at a Solution
Now it appears to me that the author is making the a priori assumption that:
[itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = L[/itex] and [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = L[/itex]
and using that in his proof to show the two are equal. But I'm doubtful this is a legitimate jump.
Let's do a different setup and I'll show you want I mean.
Given [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = L[/itex] and [itex]\lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h) = M[/itex] , prove [itex]\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = \lim_{h \to 0} f(a + h)[/itex]
[itex]0 < |x - a| < \delta[/itex] implies [itex]|f(x) - L| < \epsilon[/itex]
Now if
[itex]0 < |h| < \delta[/itex] then
[itex]0 < |(h + a) - a| < \delta[/itex] implies [itex]|f(a + h) - M| < \epsilon[/itex]
Oh wait, we can't go any further.. The two are not necessarily equal because L might not equal M.
So I'm pretty sure the book is right and I'm wrong.. so what's the error in my logic?
- Rob