One more try at epsilon-delta limits

  • Thread starter Thread starter KiwiKid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits
KiwiKid
Messages
38
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that lim[x->5] 3x^2 - 1 = 74

Homework Equations


Epsilon-delta stuff.

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok, so first we have to find delta in terms of epsilon, and this is particularly sucky because it's a nonlinear function. Here's my attempt:

|3x^2 - 1 - 74| = |3||x - 5||x + 5| < ε → |x - 5||x + 5| < ε/3
Define C > |x + 5| → |x + 5||x - 5| < C|x - 5|
Define |x - 5| < ε/(3C) = δ

Now we have to find an actual value for C, so let's put a boundary of 1 on δ:

|x - 5| < 1 → |x + 5| < 11
C = 11

Now here's my attempt at the actual proof:

Let ε > 0, δ=min{1, ε/(3C)}=min{1, ε/33}
|3x^2 - 75| = |3||x + 5||x - 5| < 3 * 11 * ε/(3C) = 33 * ε/33 = ε
Therefore |x - 5| < δ implies |(3x^2 - 1) - 74| < ε
Ergo lim[x->5] 3x^2 - 1 = 74

Does that sound about right? I have the feeling that my proof might be missing a few bits. I also don't completely understand why I have to say δ=min{1, ε/33}. I suppose there's a specific reason δ=ε/33 won't work, but I don't see it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you "need to find" a value for C? Showing that C exists is sufficient.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Why do you "need to find" a value for C? Showing that C exists is sufficient.

*scratches head* Now that you mention it, I don't know. I take it I don't need to know a value for C because it ends up as 3*|x + 5||x - 5| < 3*C*ε/C, where the C's cancel each other out?

But, uhm, I don't really know. As I've said in a few posts before this one, I'm very unfamiliar with mathematical proofs, as most of what I've done before was of the 'just plug in numbers'-kind. I tried to do this as close to the book (Stewart's Calculus) as I could. I find it all very vague. On the one hand you need to *find* numbers, but on the other people keep talking about how you simply *define* all constants to mean I-don't-know-what.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Back
Top