Proving Continuity for h(x) = x^x = e^xlnx, Given f(x) = e^x and g(x) = lnx

  • Thread starter Thread starter kathrynag
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the continuity of the function h(x) = x^x, which is expressed in terms of two other functions: f(x) = e^x and g(x) = lnx. The focus is on the continuity of h(x) for x > 0, given that f and g are continuous.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between h(x) and the composition of f and g, questioning whether h(x) can be expressed as f(g(x)).
  • Some participants discuss the implications of continuity for the product of functions and how that relates to the continuity of h(x).
  • There are attempts to formulate an epsilon-delta proof, with participants raising questions about variable usage and connections between different parts of the proof.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing guidance on the continuity of composite functions and the product of continuous functions. There is a focus on clarifying the use of variables in the context of epsilon-delta proofs, indicating a productive exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of continuity proofs and are considering the implications of continuity for the functions involved. There is an emphasis on ensuring that variable assignments do not lead to confusion in the proof process.

kathrynag
Messages
595
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


f(x)=e^x
g(x)=lnx
h(x)=x^x=e^xlnx

If f and g are continuous prove h(x) is continious for x>0

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Ok this confuses me, because I would think that it wouldn't be too bad too do if h(x)=f(g(x)). Maybe the book had a typo?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
this is just f(x*g(x)). What do you know about x*g(x) if g is continuous?
 
Office_Shredder said:
this is just f(x*g(x)). What do you know about x*g(x) if g is continuous?

Then lx-x0l<[tex]\delta[/tex]
Then lxg(x)-x[tex]_{0}g(x_{0})[/tex]l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]
 
Hmm well if you've proved that the product of two continuous functions is continuous (which is easy, provided that you know the proof that the limit of a product is the product of limits), then I don't think you need to resort to epsilon delta for x*g(x).

Also, f is continuous, so basically you have a lot of continuous functions involved in different operations. If you've already proved that f(g(x)) is continuous at a point a if g(x) is continuous at a and f is continuous at g(a), then you could save yourself a lot of trouble.
 
snipez90 said:
Also, f is continuous, so basically you have a lot of continuous functions involved in different operations. If you've already proved that f(g(x)) is continuous at a point a if g(x) is continuous at a and f is continuous at g(a), then you could save yourself a lot of trouble.

Ok, how do I do that epsilon delta proof?
 
lx-al<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]

f continuous at g(a)
lx-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lf(x)-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]
 
A few comments to point you in the right direction. We want |x-a|<[tex]\delta[/tex] to imply that lf(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex].

kathrynag said:
lx-al<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]

This is fine, except one variable should be changed. We want to somehow connect this to our second fact, which is

kathrynag said:
f continuous at g(a)
lx-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lf(x)-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]

Ok, obviously we want to be careful about using the same variables. Since x is used to represent elements in the domain of g, let's use y to represent the elements in the domain f. Making this change, we have

f continuous at g(a)
ly-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lf(y)-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]

Now note that if we replace y with g(x), which is certainly allowed, we are very close to what we need. Namely, lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex] implies that |f(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]. But we also know that we reserved the variable delta for lx-al<[tex]\delta[/tex]. So we need to change the delta in lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex] to some other variable.

In fact, we can choose any variable that is greater than 0 (Why?). So let's choose d' (delta prime). Now how can we use the fact that d' > 0 to connect our delta in |x-a| < [tex]\delta[/tex] to our epsilon in |f(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]?
 
snipez90 said:
A few comments to point you in the right direction. We want |x-a|<[tex]\delta[/tex] to imply that lf(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex].



This is fine, except one variable should be changed. We want to somehow connect this to our second fact, which is
Should it be changed to a f or are you talking about a change from x to y?



snipez90 said:
Ok, obviously we want to be careful about using the same variables. Since x is used to represent elements in the domain of g, let's use y to represent the elements in the domain f. Making this change, we have

f continuous at g(a)
ly-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex]
lf(y)-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]

Now note that if we replace y with g(x), which is certainly allowed, we are very close to what we need. Namely, lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex] implies that |f(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]. But we also know that we reserved the variable delta for lx-al<[tex]\delta[/tex]. So we need to change the delta in lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex] to some other variable.

In fact, we can choose any variable that is greater than 0 (Why?). So let's choose d' (delta prime). Now how can we use the fact that d' > 0 to connect our delta in |x-a| < [tex]\delta[/tex] to our epsilon in |f(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]?
Ok so there is d' such that lg(x)-g(a)l<[tex]\delta[/tex]. then |f(g(x))-f(g(a)l<[tex]\epsilon[/tex]
 
Ok, here's my start:
h(x)=[tex]x^{x}[/tex]
Then h(x)=f(xg(x))
Choose [tex]\epsilon[/tex]<0. There is [tex]\delta_{1}[/tex]>0 such that if [tex]\left|y-x_{0}g(x_{0})\right|[/tex]<[tex]\delta_{1}[/tex].
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K