Need help Proving infinite limit properties.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving properties of infinite limits in the context of functions approaching infinity and a finite limit. Participants seek clarification on the implications of these properties and the notation used in the proofs.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a scenario involving limits where limx->c f(x) = ∞ and limx->c g(x) = l, questioning the origin of the limit l.
  • Another participant points out a potential change in notation regarding the limits of g, suggesting confusion over the variables used in the proofs.
  • A later reply clarifies that l is simply the limit of g(x) and emphasizes the need to prove the existence of a δ such that |f(x)g(x)| > M for any M > 0.
  • The same reply suggests starting from the desired outcome to understand how to achieve |f(x)g(x)| > M, noting the behavior of f(x) and g(x) as x approaches c.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express confusion over the notation and the implications of the proofs, indicating that there is no consensus on the understanding of the proofs or the notation used.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not resolved the confusion regarding the notation and the implications of the limits, which may affect their understanding of the proofs presented.

leoxy520
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Suppose that limx->c f(x) = infinity and limx->c g(x)=l where l is a real number. Prove the following.
limx->c[f(x)+g(x)]= infinity
limx->c[f(x)g(x)]= infinity if l > 0
limx->c[f(x)g(x)]= -infinity if l < 0

I have the proof for these already, but I couldn't understand them, would someone please explain them.
The thing I don't understand is where does the L come from, but explanation in general would be greatly appreciated

Here is the proof for the second one:

[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/190/unledmkd.png/][PLAIN]http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/2665/unledmkd.png[/URL]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/PLAIN]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There seems to be a change of notation. In the original, g -> c when x -> a. In the equations in question, g -> L when x -> c.
 
mathman said:
There seems to be a change of notation. In the original, g -> c when x -> a. In the equations in question, g -> L when x -> c.

sorry, i corrected it, does anyone have the explanation for this proof ?
 
What do you mean "where does the L come from"? It is the limit of the function g(x).

I remind you, what you need to prove, is that given an M>0, you can find a [itex]\delta>0[/itex], so that for every x that satisfied |x-c|<[itex]\delta[/itex],
|f(x)g(x)| > M hold.

The proof shows the existence of such a [itex]\delta>0[/itex].

In order to do this alone, however, you should start from the end. You should ask yourself, how can I make |f(x)g(x)| > M happen?
You need to remember that f(x) can be as big as you want when you're close enough to c, and that g(x) can be as close to L as you'd like when you're close enough to c.

That's exactly what they used in the proof.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
15K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K