Quick Question about continuity at a point

  • Thread starter Thread starter tylerc1991
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity Point
tylerc1991
Messages
158
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have always been comfortable with proving continuity of a function on an interval, but I have been running into problems proving that a function is continuous at a point in it's domain. For example:

Prove f(x) = x^2 is continuous at x = 7.

Homework Equations



We will be using the delta epsilon definition of continuity here.

The Attempt at a Solution



Let f(x) = x^2 and \varepsilon > 0.

Choose \delta= ________ (usually we choose \delta last, so I am just leaving it blank right now).

Now, if |x - y| = |7 - y| = |y - 7| < \delta, then

|f(x) - f(y)| = |49 - y^2| = |y^2 - 49| = |y + 7||y - 7|.

This is where it gets a little awkward for me. I know that I may say |y - 7| < \delta, but what do I do with the |y + 7|? Could I say that |y + 7| < \delta + 14? Then I would have to choose a \delta such that \delta (\delta + 14) = \varepsilon.

Thank you for your help anyone!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is probably a way to write the proof using mostly references to absoulte values. However, it is useful to know how to "grunge it out" when no elegant way comes to mind.

When you have to get down and dirty, it is best to write things like |y-7| < \delta in the equivalent form of:

eq 1. 7 - \delta < y < 7 + \delta

(For simplicity I'll label them "equations" but the they actually are inequalities.)

To square eq. 1 and keep the inequality marks pointed the same way, we must make sure that all the terms are positive. We can make 7 - \delta > 0 by chosing \delta < 7, so remember this condition. Squaring eq 1., we get:

eq. 2. 49 - 14 \delta + \delta^2 < y^2 < 49 + 14\delta + \delta^2

To get the functions of \delta to be closer to y^2 than \epsilon we need eq. 3 and eq. 4 to hold:

eq 3. 49 - \epsilon < 49 - 14 \delta + \delta^2

eq. 4. 49 + 14\delta + \delta^2 < 49 + \epsilon

Thos equations simplify to eq 5. and eq 6. respectively:

eq 5. -\epsilon < -14 \delta + \delta^2

eq 6. 14 \delta +\delta^2 < \epsilon

Mutliplying eq 5. by -1 and reversing the inequality sign gives:

eq 7. 14 \delta - \delta^2 < \epsilon

If eq. 6 holds then eq 7 would also, so we only worry about eq 6.

Rather than worry about solving quadratic equations, it's simpler to take advantage of the fact that we are dealing with inequalities and trying to make \delta small.

So add the condition 0 < \delta < 1 so that we can say \delta^2 < \delta

This and eq 6. imply that we want:

eq 8. 0 < 14 \delta + \delta^2 < 14\delta + \delta < \epsilon

eq 9. 15 \delta < \epsilon

So this imples we want:

eq 10. \delta < \frac {\epsilon}{15}

We can satisfy eq 10. by setting \delta equal to various things, for example \delta = (0.5)\frac{\epsilon}{15} or \delta = \frac{\epsilon}{16} etc.

We have to remember the previous assumptions we made on \delta.
To incorporate all of them , it is sufficient to say:

eq 11. Let \delta = min\{ \frac{\epsilon}{16}, 1.0 \}


To have a real proof you have to go through the reasoning in reverse order.
 
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