Proving Limit Laws: Epsilon/Delta Definition

  • Thread starter Thread starter ciubba
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laws Limit
ciubba
Messages
65
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Prove that \lim_{x->a}[f(x)+g(x)]=\lim_{x->a}[f(x)]+\lim_{x->a}[g(x)]

Homework Equations


Epsilon/delta definition

The Attempt at a Solution



The book says:

Let the limit of f(x)=L and the limit of g(x)=M. Then,

\mid f(x)-L \mid<\frac{\epsilon}{2} whenever 0<\mid x-a \mid<\delta_{1}
and
\mid g(x)-M \mid<\frac{\epsilon}{2} whenever 0<\mid x-a \mid<\delta_{2}

Let \delta=min \big\{ \delta_{1} ,\delta_{2} \big\} and suppose 0<\mid x-a \mid<\delta. Because \delta\leq\delta_{1}, it follows that 0<|x-a|\delta_{1} and |f(x)-L<\frac{\epsilon}{2}.

Similarly, \delta\leq\delta_{2}, it follows that 0<|x-a|\delta_{2} and |g(x)-L<\frac{\epsilon}{2}. Therefore,

|[f(x)+g(x)]-(L+M)|<\epsilon, which implies that ]\lim_{x->a}[f(x)+g(x)]=L+M=\lim_{x->a}[f(x)]+\lim_{x->a}[g(x)]

My biggest question is from where they obtained a value of epsilon/2 from. I feel that I cannot even begin to understand the proof until I understand that point.

Edit: The latex didn't come out as clearly as I'd hoped, so here is a picture: http://s9.postimg.org/7gfz3owul/Proof.gif
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Read the first sentence after SOLUTION in the picture: "Assume that ε > 0 is given " You can require that both functions deviate from their limit less than half of the given ε.
 
ehild said:
Read the first sentence after SOLUTION in the picture: "Assume that ε > 0 is given " You can require that both functions deviate from their limit less than half of the given ε.

Yes, I saw that, but I also could have defined it as < ε/3 or 2piε/4. What is the significance of making it ε/2? I looked at a proof for the product limit laws and saw a similar technique employed.
 
You have to find δ so as the deviation of the combined function f(x)+g(x) from its limit is less than ε. The simplest is to choose equal ε1 and ε2 for the functions f and g, so as ε1+ε2 = ε. But you have the freedom to choose ε/3 for one function and 2/3 ε for the other one, or anything else if they are positive and their sum is ε.
 
ciubba said:
Yes, I saw that, but I also could have defined it as < ε/3 or 2piε/4. What is the significance of making it ε/2? I looked at a proof for the product limit laws and saw a similar technique employed.

It really does not matter. For any (small) ##\epsilon' > 0## we can find ##\delta > 0## such that ##|f(x)-L| < 3 \epsilon'## and ##|g(x) -M |< 2 \pi \epsilon'## for ##|x - a| < \delta##. Then we have
|f(x) + g(x) - (L+M)| &lt; (3 + 2 \pi) \epsilon&#039;
for ##|x-a| < \delta##. Now just put ##\epsilon = (3 + 2 \pi) \epsilon'##. Given any (small) ##\epsilon > 0## we can thus find ##\delta > 0## such that ##|f(x) + g(x) - (L+M)| < \epsilon## if ##|x-a| < \delta##. We do that by putting ##\epsilon' = \epsilon/(3 + 2 \pi)## and using the ##\delta## that goes along with ##\epsilon'##. It is just a lot neater to put ##\epsilon' = \epsilon/2##.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
844
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top