1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Homework Help: Negation of Limit

  1. Nov 21, 2005 #1
    so is that a good negation of the defenition of the limit?

    A function f with domain D doesnt not have limit L at a point c in D iff
    not for every number E > 0 there is a corresponding number G >0 such if |F(x) - L| <E then is not the case 0< |x-a|<G
    am i right? wat am i doing wrong?
    thx so much. I made a new post that way ppl wont get confuse with the other post.
    thank u so much
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 21, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I am guessing that the statement you want to negate is something like "for each e there is a d such that X(d) implies Y(e)." So the negation should be "for some e there is not any d such that X(d) implies Y(e)."
  4. Nov 21, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's easy if you use quantifiers:
    Definition of [itex]\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=L[/itex]:

    [tex]\forall \epsilon>0 \exists \delta>0 : |x-a|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x)-L|<\epsilon[/tex]

    To negate this, simply use the rules:
    [tex]\neg (\forall x:P) \iff \exists x: \neg P[/tex]
    [tex]\neg (\exists x:P) \iff \forall x : \neg P[/tex]
  5. Nov 21, 2005 #4
    is this right?

    is this the right negation of the statement above?

    [tex]\exists\epsilon>0 \forall \delta>0 : |x-a|<\delta \wedge\|f(x)-L|\geq\epsilon[/tex]

    i am also using this fact
    ~(P=>Q) = P^~Q

    how can i illustrate this negation? would it be a function that is not continous at a point such as f(x) = 1/(x+1)?
    thank you very much for al ur help!
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
  6. Nov 23, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I always seem to forget that f(a) isn't important in the definition.
    The function doesn't even have to be defined at the limit point. The correct definition is:

    [tex]\forall \epsilon>0 \exists \delta>0 : 0<|x-a|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x)-L|<\epsilon[/tex]

    So change [itex]|x-a|<\varepsilon[/itex] to [itex]0<|x-a|<\varepsilon[/itex], then it's correct.

    This is different from continuity! A function is continuous at a if [itex]\lim \limits_{x\to a}f(x)=f(a)[/itex], which says 3 things:
    1. The limit exists
    2. f(a) is defined
    3. The 2 are equal.

    More precisely, a function is continuous at x=a if
    [tex]\forall \epsilon>0 \exists \delta>0 : |x-a|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x)-f(a)|<\epsilon[/tex]

    The function 1/(x+1) is perfectly continuous everwhere on its domain. The point f(-1) is not defined so it's no problem. If you define f(-1)=0, then it's not continuous anymore.
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2005
  7. Feb 13, 2009 #6
    Is this the right negation of a finite limit?

    \neg(\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=L) \iff \exists \epsilon>0 \forall \delta>0\exists x: 0<|x-a|<\delta \Rightarrow |f(x)-L|\geq\epsilon \vee \neg\exists f(x) [/tex]

Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook