Prove 2 Limits Questions with Definition 2.4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter uchihajeff
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving two limit statements using Definition 2.4.1, which involves demonstrating that for any positive epsilon, a corresponding delta can be found to satisfy the limit conditions. The specific limits in question are for the functions 1/(x+1) as x approaches -2 and sqrt(x) as x approaches 4.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the manipulation of expressions to fit the limit definition, with some attempting to establish relationships between the variables involved. There are questions about the correctness of certain steps, particularly regarding the treatment of absolute values and the conditions under which limits are evaluated.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide hints and guidance on how to approach the problems, suggesting the need to rearrange expressions to isolate the necessary terms for applying the limit definition. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of the definitions and the steps required to prove the limits.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential issues with the original poster's attempts, including misunderstandings about the application of absolute values and the conditions for x in relation to the limits being evaluated. There is also mention of textbook answers that may not align with the participants' discussions.

uchihajeff
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Use Definition 2.4.1 to prove that the stated limit is correct.

Definition 2.4.1 in my book is:

lim as x->a of f(x) = L

if given any number e(epsilon)>0 we can find a number d(delta)>0 such that

|f(x)-L|<e if 0<|x-a|<d​

Homework Equations


Question 31. lim as x>-2 of 1/(x+1) = -1
Question 33. lim as x>4 of sqrt(x) = 2

The Attempt at a Solution


31. |1/(x+1) + 1|<e, 0<|x+2|<d
|(x+2)/(x+1)|<e
set d<=1
-1<x+2<1, -2<x+1<0
|x+1|<0
|x+2|< e * |x+1|
...then I get stuck

32. |sqrt(x)-2|<e, 0<x-4<d
sqrt(x)<e-2
x<(e-2)^2
x-4<(e-2)^2-4
...by here I'm probably already wrong
d=(e-2)^2-4

4. The answers in the back of the book
31) d=min(1,e/(1+e))
33) d=2e

P.S. Sorry, I don't know how to use Latex or whatever mathematical typing system you guys use here, so it's a little messy/unreadable.
Thanks in advance for the help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well one of the best way and probably only way to prove limits using the absic definition is to do like thsi

suppose i need to prove

[tex]\lim _{x/to/a} f(x)= b[/tex]
that means i have to prove for every positive real number [tex]\epsilon[/tex] there exists a positive [tex]delta[/tex] such that

[tex]|f(x)-b| < \epsilon[/tex] for all real x satisfying [tex]|x-a| < \delta[/tex]

for a moment assume that there exists a x such that
[tex]|f(x)-b| < \epsilon[/tex]
manipulate such that u reach a stage where [tex]k|x-a| < \epsilon[/tex]
for some constant k then ur [tex]\delta[/tex] is
[tex]k\epsilon[/tex]
here the best way i would prefer is u looking into the proof of the fact that
[tex]\lim_{x \to a} \frac{f}{g}=\frac{\lim_{ x \to a} f}{\lim_{x \to a} g}[/tex]...
and similarly for the second part
[tex]\lim_{x \to a} f^{\frac{1}{n}}={\lim f }^{\frac{1}{n}}[/tex]...
 
uchihajeff said:
-1<x+2<1, -2<x+1<0
|x+1|<0

|x+2|< e * |x+1|

This part is wrong, you are taking the absolute value of x + 1, and you have -2 < x + 1 < 0, you should have 0 < |x + 1| < 2, not |x + 1| < 0

pardesi said:
...
[tex]|f(x)-b| < \epsilon[/tex] for all real x satisfying [tex]|x-a| < \delta[/tex]

Well, nope, x cannot be a, you should add '0 <' part in front of it, like this:
[tex]0 < |x - a| < \delta \Rightarrow |f(x) - b| < \epsilon[/tex]. :)

Yup, as pardesi has pointed out, you should re-arrange the expression, so that you could obtain:
|f(x) - b| < ... < k |x - a| < epsilon (where k is any constant, this is the tricky part, you should find the appropriate k)
~~~> |x - a| < epsilon / k

So we can choose delta to be (epsilon / k), so, for:
[tex]x : 0 < |x - a| < \delta = \frac{\epsilon}{k} \Rightarrow |f(x) - b| < ... < k |x - a| < k \epsilon < k \times \frac{\epsilon}{k} = \epsilon[/tex] as required.

---------------------------------

I'll help you do the first problem, and give you some hints for the seconds one, they are pretty much the same. :)

Problem 1:
Prove:
[tex]\lim_{x \rightarrow -2} \frac{1}{x + 1} = -1[/tex]

So, we'll start here:
[tex]\left| \frac{1}{x + 1} + 1 \right| = \left| \frac{x + 2}{x + 1} \right| = \textcolor{blue}{\left| \frac{1}{x + 1} \right|} \textcolor{red}{|x + 2|}[/tex].

Now, we will obtain the k from the blue part. We will find out the maximum value for |1 / (x+1)|, and assign k to be that value.

To find the maximum value for |1 / (x+1)|, we'll make the restriction:
[tex]\textcolor{green} {0 < |x + 2| < \delta \leq 0.5} \Rightarrow 0 < |x + 2| < 0.5 \Rightarrow -0.5 < x + 2 < 0.5[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow -1.5 < x + 1 < -0.5 \Rightarrow 0.5 < |x + 1| < 1.5 \Rightarrow \frac{2}{3} < \frac{1}{|x + 1|} < 2[/tex].

Ok, so we have:
[tex]\left| \frac{1}{x + 1} + 1 \right| = \textcolor{blue}{\left| \frac{1}{x + 1} \right|} \textcolor{red}{|x + 2|} < \textcolor{blue}{2} \textcolor{red}{|x + 2|}[/tex], ok, so we choose:

[tex]\delta = \mbox{min} \left( 0.5 , \frac{\epsilon}{2} \right)[/tex].

I think your textbook's answer is, somehow, mistyped.

Ok, let's think about it, in the green part above (I mean, the restriction part), why didn't I choose: [tex]0 < |x + 2| < \delta \leq 1[/tex]? I didn't choose 1, that's not appropriate in this case. Can you see why?

--------------------------------------

So, now, hint for second problem. :)

We must rearrange the expression to give k |x - a|, i.e, we must have |x - a| in our expression, so, multiply by its conjugate, we obtain.

[tex]|\sqrt{x} - 2| = \frac{\textcolor{red}{|x - 2|}}{\textcolor{blue}{| \sqrt{x} + 2 |}}[/tex]

Can you go from here? :)

--------------------------------------

EDIT: I have corrected the last LaTeX code for like 3 times, but it still shows the wrong image. >"<

Ok, now, LaTeX seems to work normally again. ^.^
 
Last edited:
VietDao29 said:
Well, nope, x cannot be a, you should add '0 <' part in front of it, like this:
well it is not necessary that x be b but there is no problem if it hiolds true for b infact then it becomes continious at that point:smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K