Proving Even Fct Lim x->0 f(x)=L iff Lim x->0+ f(x)=L

MathSquareRoo
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that if f: R->R is an even function, then lim x->0 f(x)=L if and only if lim x->0+ f(x)=L.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



So far I have:

If f is an even function f(x)=f(-x) for x in domain of f.

Then I am trying to apply the limit definitions, but am unsure of how to write the proof from here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MathSquareRoo said:

Homework Statement


Prove that if f: R->R is an even function, then lim x->0 f(x)=L if and only if lim x->0+ f(x)=L.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



So far I have:

If f is an even function f(x)=f(-x) for x in domain of f.

Then I am trying to apply the limit definitions, but am unsure of how to write the proof from here.

Write down the definition of lim x->0+ f(x)=L. Now change x to -x. Doesn't it look like the definition of lim x->0- f(x)=L once you use that f is even?
 
So lim x->0+ f(x)=L implies there exists a real number L s.t. epsilon>0 there exists delta>0 s.t. lf(x)-Ll<epsilon provided 0<x-a<delta.

Then lim x->0+ f(-x)=L implies that there exists a real number L s.t. epsilon>0 there exists delta>0 s.t. lf(-x)-Ll<epsilon provided 0<x-a<delta.

I have the definitions, but I don't understand the last part of your comment, can you clarify?
 
MathSquareRoo said:
So lim x->0+ f(x)=L implies there exists a real number L s.t. epsilon>0 there exists delta>0 s.t. lf(x)-Ll<epsilon provided 0<x-a<delta.

Then lim x->0+ f(-x)=L implies that there exists a real number L s.t. epsilon>0 there exists delta>0 s.t. lf(-x)-Ll<epsilon provided 0<x-a<delta.

I have the definitions, but I don't understand the last part of your comment, can you clarify?


'a' in your problem is 0. 0<x<delta, is the same as -delta<-x<0. What does the definition of lim x->0- f(x)=L look like?
 
lim x->0- f(x)=L implies that there exists a real number L s.t. epsilon>0 there exists delta>0 s.t. lf(x)-Ll<epsilon provided 0<a-x<delta.

I'm am getting confused with all these definitions though, can you help me organize the argument using the definitions?
 
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...
Back
Top