Proving h = fg is continuous when f and g are continuous at x

  • Thread starter Thread starter tylerc1991
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
7 replies · 3K views
tylerc1991
Messages
158
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Given two functions [itex]f[/itex] and [itex]g[/itex], if [itex]f[/itex] and [itex]g[/itex] are continuous at a point [itex]x[/itex], then the function [itex]h = fg[/itex] is continuous at [itex]x[/itex].

Homework Equations



Lemma 1
If a function [itex]f[/itex] is continuous at a point [itex]x[/itex], then f is bounded on some interval centered at [itex]x[/itex]. That is, there exists an [itex]M \geq 0[/itex] and a [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that for all [itex]y[/itex],
[itex]|x - y| < \delta \implies |f(y)| \leq M.[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution

Let [itex]f[/itex] and [itex]g[/itex] be functions that are continuous at a point [itex]x[/itex].
Define a new function [itex]h[/itex] as [itex]h = fg[/itex].
Let [itex]\varepsilon > 0[/itex] and [itex]\delta_1 > 0[/itex].
If [itex]f(x) = 0[/itex], then it is trivially true that for all [itex]y[/itex],
[itex]\displaystyle |x - y| < \delta_1 \implies |f(x)||g(x) - g(y)| < \varepsilon,[/itex]
so assume [itex]f(x) \neq 0[/itex].
Now, suppose [itex]\displaystyle \mu = \frac{\varepsilon}{|f(x)|}[/itex].
Clearly [itex]\mu[/itex] is a positive real number.
Since [itex]g[/itex] is continuous at [itex]x[/itex], for all [itex]\varepsilon[/itex], there exists a [itex]\delta_1[/itex] such that
[itex]|x - y| < \delta_1 \implies |g(x) - g(y)| < \mu. \quad \quad (1)[/itex]
Let [itex]M = 0[/itex]. Lemma 1 states that, since [itex]g[/itex] is continuous, there exists a [itex]\delta_2 > 0[/itex] such that [itex]|x - y| < \delta_2 \implies |g(y)| \leq M = 0.[/itex] So,
[itex]|x - y| < \delta_2 \implies |g(y)| = 0. \quad \quad (2)[/itex]
Let [itex]\delta = \text{min}( \delta_1, \delta_2 )[/itex]. Then [itex]|x - y| < \delta[/itex] implies
[itex]|h(x) - h(y)| = |f(x)g(x) - f(y)g(y)|[/itex]
[itex]= |f(x)g(x) - f(x)g(y) + f(x)g(y) - f(y)g(y)|[/itex]
[itex]\leq |f(x)g(x) - f(x)g(y)| + |f(x)g(y) - f(y)g(y)|[/itex]
[itex]= |f(x)||g(x) - g(y)| + |g(y)||f(x) - f(y)|[/itex]
[itex]< |f(x)| \mu + 0 = \varepsilon.[/itex] QED

Pointing out any mistakes / giving constructive criticism is welcome. Thank you very much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tylerc1991 said:
Let [itex]M = 0[/itex]. Lemma 1 states that, since [itex]g[/itex] is continuous, there exists a [itex]\delta_2 > 0[/itex] such that [itex]|x - y| < \delta_2 \implies |g(y)| \leq M = 0.[/itex] So,

You can't just set M=0. All lemma 1 says is that there exists an M, but that M is potentially very large. You have no control over what value M has. So saying that M=0 is not ok.
 
Could I say that [itex]M = \frac{\varepsilon}{2|f(x) - f(y)|}[/itex]?
Then [itex]M \geq 0[/itex]

Then I would have to reset [itex]\mu = \frac{\varepsilon}{2|f(x)|}[/itex] in order for everything to cancel and add up to [itex]\varepsilon[/itex]
 
tylerc1991 said:
Could I say that [itex]M = \frac{\varepsilon}{2|f(x) - f(y)|}[/itex]?
Then [itex]M \geq 0[/itex]

Then I would have to reset [itex]\mu = \frac{\varepsilon}{2|f(x)|}[/itex] in order for everything to cancel and add to [itex]\varepsilon[/itex]

No, you cannot choose M. You can choose epsilon though.
 
micromass said:
No, you cannot choose M. You can choose epsilon though.

So the lemma is pretty pointless in this case? Can I try something like:

I know that since [itex]f[/itex] is continuous, I can choose a [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that

[itex]|x - y| < \delta \implies |f(x) - f(y)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2|g(y)|}[/itex]?
 
tylerc1991 said:
So the lemma is pretty pointless in this case? Can I try something like:

I know that since [itex]f[/itex] is continuous, I can choose a [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that

[itex]|x - y| < \delta \implies |f(x) - f(y)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2|g(y)|}[/itex]?

No since your "epsilon" is [itex]\frac{\varepsilon}{2|g(y)|}[/itex] and is dependent on y. It shouldn't be dependent on y. It can depend on x, though.
 
OK, since [itex]g[/itex] is continuous, we may say that there exists a [itex]\delta_1[/itex]

[itex]|x - y| < \delta_1 \implies |g(y)| < |g(x)| + 1[/itex].

Also, since [itex]f[/itex] is continuous, there exists a [itex]\delta_2[/itex] such that

[itex]|x - y| < \delta_2 \implies |f(x) - f(y)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2(|g(x)| + 1)}[/itex].

This would cancel fine and would add to [itex]\varepsilon[/itex] in the end, but this way seems so roundabout. Is there no nicer way?
 
tylerc1991 said:
OK, since [itex]g[/itex] is continuous, we may say that there exists a [itex]\delta_1[/itex]

[itex]|x - y| < \delta_1 \implies |g(y)| < |g(x)| + 1[/itex].

Also, since [itex]f[/itex] is continuous, there exists a [itex]\delta_2[/itex] such that

[itex]|x - y| < \delta_2 \implies |f(x) - f(y)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2(|g(x)| + 1)}[/itex].

This would cancel fine and would add to [itex]\varepsilon[/itex] in the end, but this way seems so roundabout. Is there no nicer way?

Thay seems ok! :smile: