Need Help with Homework: Question 1, 4 and 5

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anakin_k
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Homework
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The original poster seeks assistance with a homework assignment consisting of five questions, specifically requesting help with question 4 and confirmation of solutions for questions 1 and 5. The context appears to involve limits and proofs related to functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the proof structure for question 4, exploring the implications of limits and the conditions under which the proof holds. Some participants express uncertainty about the original poster's solutions for questions 1 and 5, while others provide feedback on the validity of those solutions.

Discussion Status

There is ongoing discussion regarding the proof for question 4, with some participants offering detailed reasoning. The original poster's solutions for questions 1 and 5 are being evaluated, but no consensus has been reached on their correctness.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that posting complete solutions is against forum rules, encouraging hints and questions instead. There is a specific mention of the assumption that a certain variable does not equal zero in the context of the proof.

Anakin_k
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone, I am in need of a little assistance. I have a homework assignment due soon that consists of 5 questions. Of which, I have done all but the 4th one. I did start on it but I'm not sure where to go from there. I also would like for someone to confirm my solutions for question 1 and 5, as I'm not too sure about them (I am confident with Q2 and Q3).

Here are the questions: http://i56.tinypic.com/30nb1xf.png

Question 1 solution: http://i52.tinypic.com/2hfht83.jpg
Question 5 solution: http://i56.tinypic.com/2jdhlzl.jpg
Question 4 beginning: http://i53.tinypic.com/15dvs6w.jpg

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can attempt to help on Question 4:

Proof:
Let [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex]. Since [itex]\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} g(x) = l[/itex], there exists an [itex]N_0[/itex] such that if [itex]x > N_0[/itex], then [itex]|g(x) - l| < \epsilon/2[/itex] (*).

Similary, there exists an [itex]N_1[/itex] such that if [itex]x > N_1[/itex], then [itex]|f(x)-m|<\epsilon/(2|-a|)[/itex]. It follows from the last inequality that [itex]|-af(x)+am|<\epsilon/2[/itex] (**).

Now choose [itex]N=\max\{N_0, \, N_1\}[/itex]. So if [itex]x > N[/itex], inequalities (*) and (**) must hold. And adding (*) with (**), we get

[itex]|g(x)-l| + |-af(x)+am| < \epsilon/2 + \epsilon/2 = \epsilon[/itex].

But by the triangle inequality,

[itex]|(g(x)-l) +(-af(x)+am)| \leq |g(x)-l| + |-af(x)+am|[/itex].

Rearranging terms on the left-hand side of the above inequality, I think you get what you want: If [itex]x > N[/itex], then [itex]|(g(x)-af(x))-(l-am)| < \epsilon[/itex].

I hope this helps.

P.S. I forgot, this proof assumes [itex]a[/itex] does not equal zero. In the case it does equal zero, the problem reduces down to showing [itex]\lim_{x \rightarrow}(g(x)-0f(x)) = \lim_{x \rightarrow}(g(x)-0) = \lim_{x \rightarrow}g(x) = l - 0m = l[/itex], and this is already true since it's given.
 
Last edited:
That was extremely thorough Mathstatnoob, thank you for taking the time to post the answer. I appreciate it very much. Through your steps, I've learned how to manipulate little pieces here and there to arrive at the needed answer. :)

If anyone could confirm my Q1 and Q5 solutions, I'd be thankful.
 
Question 1 looks okay to me. for Q5, this is just the product lemma from the algebra of limits.
 
mathstatnoob said:
I can attempt to help on Question 4:

Proof:
Let [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex]. Since [itex]\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} g(x) = l[/itex], there exists an [itex]N_0[/itex] such that if [itex]x > N_0[/itex], then [itex]|g(x) - l| < \epsilon/2[/itex] (*).

Similary, there exists an [itex]N_1[/itex] such that if [itex]x > N_1[/itex], then [itex]|f(x)-m|<\epsilon/(2|-a|)[/itex]. It follows from the last inequality that [itex]|-af(x)+am|<\epsilon/2[/itex] (**).

Now choose [itex]N=\max\{N_0, \, N_1\}[/itex]. So if [itex]x > N[/itex], inequalities (*) and (**) must hold. And adding (*) with (**), we get

[itex]|g(x)-l| + |-af(x)+am| < \epsilon/2 + \epsilon/2 = \epsilon[/itex].

But by the triangle inequality,

[itex]|(g(x)-l) +(-af(x)+am)| \leq |g(x)-l| + |-af(x)+am|[/itex].

Rearranging terms on the left-hand side of the above inequality, I think you get what you want: If [itex]x > N[/itex], then [itex]|(g(x)-af(x))-(l-am)| < \epsilon[/itex].

I hope this helps.

P.S. I forgot, this proof assumes [itex]a[/itex] does not equal zero. In the case it does equal zero, the problem reduces down to showing [itex]\lim_{x \rightarrow}(g(x)-0f(x)) = \lim_{x \rightarrow}(g(x)-0) = \lim_{x \rightarrow}g(x) = l - 0m = l[/itex], and this is already true since it's given.

Please re-read the Rules link at the top of the page. Posting solutions to homework questions is not permitted here. Instead, please provide hints, ask questions, find mistakes, etc.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K