Saladsamurai
- 3,009
- 7
Alrighty-then 
I am going over a proof in Thomas' Calculus and I am not understanding a step.
Given that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}f(x)=L \text{ and } \lim_{x\rightarrow c}g(x)=M[/itex] prove that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}(f(x)+g(x))=L+M[/itex]
Solution: He uses the triangle inequality to break up the summation
[itex]|f(x)+g(x))-(L+M)|\le|f(x)-L|+|g(x)-M|[/itex]
Then he says:
"Since [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}f(x)=L[/itex], there exists some number [itex]\delta_1>0[/itex] such that for all x
[itex]0<|x-c|<\delta_1\Rightarrow|f(x)-L|<\epsilon/2[/itex] "
I get lost there. Why [itex]\epsilon/2[/itex]?
Thanks!
PS: Please don't yell at me Dick
I am going over a proof in Thomas' Calculus and I am not understanding a step.
Given that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}f(x)=L \text{ and } \lim_{x\rightarrow c}g(x)=M[/itex] prove that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}(f(x)+g(x))=L+M[/itex]
Solution: He uses the triangle inequality to break up the summation
[itex]|f(x)+g(x))-(L+M)|\le|f(x)-L|+|g(x)-M|[/itex]
Then he says:
"Since [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow c}f(x)=L[/itex], there exists some number [itex]\delta_1>0[/itex] such that for all x
[itex]0<|x-c|<\delta_1\Rightarrow|f(x)-L|<\epsilon/2[/itex] "
I get lost there. Why [itex]\epsilon/2[/itex]?
Thanks!
PS: Please don't yell at me Dick