Please explain use of Heine in proof of simple theorem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of Heine's theorem to prove the uniqueness of limits for functions. The original poster is confused about how the uniqueness of limits for sequences can be applied to a function, given that f(x_n) represents function values rather than a traditional sequence. Participants clarify that if a function converges to two different limits A and B, then the sequence of function values f(x_n) must also converge to both, which leads to a contradiction. The uniqueness of limits for sequences can indeed be adapted to functions, as the values f(x_n) can be treated as a sequence. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes that the convergence of f(x_n) to both limits is impossible, thus reinforcing the uniqueness of the limit of the function.
twoflower
Messages
363
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I don't fully understand the proof of uniqueness of limit of function. Our teacher proved it using the Heine's theorem. Here it is:

Proof:
Let \lim_{x \rightarrow a} f(x) = A and \lim_{x \rightarrow a} f(x) = B.

Let \left{ x_{n} \right} satisfies: \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} x_{n} = a. Then


<br /> \Longrightarrow^{Heine}<br /> \begin{array}{cc}\lim f\left( x_{n} \right) = A\\\lim f\left( x_{n} \right) = B\end{array}\right<br />

Ok, I understand this, because according to Heine it's equivalent. But I don't get the next step:

<br /> \Longrightarrow^{\mbox{Uniqueness of limit of sequence}} A = B \Longrightarrow^{Heine 2} \mbox{Uniqueness of limit of function}<br />

How can I use the uniqueness of limit of sequence here, when f\left( x_{n} \right) is not a sequence, but a function?

Thank you for the explanation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If lim(x->a) f(x)= A, then f(xn) MUST also converge to A for any sequence xn converging to a. If f converged to both A and B, then the sequence f(xn) must converge to both A and B which, apparently, you have already proved is impossible.

Actually the proof of the uniqueness the limit of a sequence can be modified to give directly a proof of the uniqueness of the limit of a function.

If f converges to both A and B, take &epsilon; to be half the distance from A to B. Then show that x can't be within &epsilon of both A and B.
 
HallsofIvy said:
...If f converged to both A and B, then the sequence f(xn) must converge to both A and B which, apparently, you have already proved is impossible.

Well, that's what I don't understand. I think that f\left(x_{n}\right) is function, not sequence. Sequence goes only over integers, whereas f\left(x_{n}\right) doesn't...That's why I can't use the uniqueness of limit of sequence directly here I think...Of course there are other ways how to prove the uniqueness of limit of function, I just want to understand this one.
 
Why can't you construct the sequence:
a_{n}=f(x_{n})??
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top