Proving Limits of Function f(x) = x^3/abs(x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathgal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Proofs
mathgal
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I have the function f(x)=x^3/abs(x)

I think that the following are all true:
lim f(x)= inf.
x->inf

lim f(x)= 0
x-> 0+

lim f(x)=0
x-> 0-

lim f(x)= -inf.
x-> -inf

and

lim f(x)= dne.
x-> 0

I'm not sure about the last one, because I thought that ususally when the limit from the left and the limit from the right are the same, this means that the lim does exist at that number (in this case 0)? But I know this function is not defined at x=0.

Now I need to prove while all these limits are what I have claimed them to be. I'm guessing I need to use the def. of continuity but I'm not sure. Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathgal said:
I have the function f(x)=x^3/abs(x)

I think that the following are all true:
lim f(x)= inf.
x->inf

lim f(x)= 0
x-> 0+

lim f(x)=0
x-> 0-

lim f(x)= -inf.
x-> -inf

and

lim f(x)= dne.
x-> 0

I'm not sure about the last one, because I thought that ususally when the limit from the left and the limit from the right are the same, this means that the lim does exist at that number (in this case 0)? But I know this function is not defined at x=0.
It's not "usually" - it's "always." The two-sided limit of a function exists iff both one-sided limits exist and are the same number. Yes, the function is not defined at x = 0, but that doesn't have any direct bearing on whether the limit exists.
mathgal said:
Now I need to prove while all these limits are what I have claimed them to be. I'm guessing I need to use the def. of continuity but I'm not sure. Please help!

You need to use the definition of the limit (with delta and epsilon). You are not proving that the function is continuous - since it's not defined at 0, it's not continuous at 0.
 
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