Real Analysis limit proof problem.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving the continuity of a piecewise function defined on the real numbers, specifically at irrational points. The function takes the value of zero for irrational inputs and a reciprocal of the denominator for rational inputs in reduced form. The goal is to show that the limit of the function as it approaches an irrational point equals the function's value at that point.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the limit definition of continuity and the need to show that rational sequences converging to an irrational point have denominators that tend to infinity. There are attempts to clarify the notation used in the original proof and its implications.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants questioning the clarity and validity of the original proof. Some suggest that the approach needs to incorporate sequences of rational numbers and their behavior as they converge to irrational numbers. There is no consensus yet on the correctness of the proof or the methods being employed.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion over specific notations and the implications of the proof structure, indicating a need for clearer definitions and explanations of the limit process involved.

gottfried
Messages
118
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Define the function f:ℝ→ℝ by f(x)=0 if x is irrational and f(p/q)=1/q if p,q are integers and q>0 and the fraction is in reduced form.

Prove f is continuous at every irrational point.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


We must show that lim x->a f(x)=f(a)=0 if a is irrational.
This is clearly true for all the irrationals near a so we need to show that

lim (p/q)->a f(x)=0
From the limit definition
[itex]\forall[/itex](|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex]-a)>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex]=(|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex] - a) > 0 such that |p/q - a|<[itex]\delta[/itex]

|p/q|<[itex]\delta[/itex] + a

|q| > [itex]\frac{|p|}{\delta + a}[/itex]

[itex]\frac{1}{|q|}[/itex] < [itex]\frac{\delta + a}{|p|}[/itex]
since [itex]\delta[/itex] = (|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex] -a)

we simplify to

|[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]|< [itex]\epsilon[/itex]

Is that a sufficient proof

Any thoughts about this is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I do not follow your proof. I do not even understand what (|p|.ϵ-a) is.

Anyway, since you have separated irrationals and rationals, then you have to prove that any sequence of rational numbers converging to an irrational has the denominator going to infinity. It looks like you are trying to prove just that, but I do not see any notion of sequences involved.
 
What you need is that for any interval [a, b], for a given q there exist only a finite number of p such that p/q is in that interval. Therefore, as you get closer and closer to any given point, the denominator must go to infinity.
 
voko said:
I do not follow your proof. I do not even understand what (|p|.ϵ-a) is.
I'm trying to use the limit definition that
lim x->a f(x)=L
if [itex]\forall[/itex] [itex]\epsilon[/itex]'>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex] > 0 such that |x-a|<[itex]\delta[/itex] implies |f(x)-L|<[itex]\epsilon[/itex]'.

In my proof I'm trying to show that
lim (p/q)->a f(x)=0
[itex]\forall[/itex] [itex]\epsilon[/itex]>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex] > 0 such that |[itex]\frac{p}{q}[/itex]-a|<[itex]\delta[/itex] implies |[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]-0|<[itex]\epsilon[/itex].

and to show this I've tried to use (|p|.ϵ-a) instead of [itex]\epsilon[/itex]' so that my inequality

[itex]\frac{1}{|q|}[/itex]<[itex]\frac{\delta + a}{|p|}[/itex] simplifies into the desired result which is

|[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]|< [itex]\epsilon[/itex]
 
That means p is both part of the ϵ specification, which is supposed to be arbitrary, and part of the value constrained by δ. That does not seem correct in any way.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K