Show that there is a M>0 such that |f(x)|<M

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the existence of a constant \( M > 0 \) such that \( |f(x)| < M \) for all \( x \in \mathbb{R} \), given that \( f: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R} \) is continuous with limits \( \lim_{x \to -\infty} f(x) = -5 \) and \( \lim_{x \to +\infty} f(x) = 5 \). Participants confirm that while \( |f(x)| < 6 \) can be established for values outside a closed interval, the exact value of \( M \) cannot be determined without additional constraints on \( f \). The conclusion emphasizes that \( M \) exists but may not be explicitly calculable.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits and continuity in real analysis.
  • Familiarity with the epsilon-delta definition of limits.
  • Knowledge of the properties of bounded functions on closed intervals.
  • Ability to analyze piecewise functions and their behavior at infinity.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of continuous functions on closed intervals to understand boundedness.
  • Explore the epsilon-delta definition of limits in greater depth.
  • Investigate examples of continuous functions with known limits to see how they behave at infinity.
  • Learn about the implications of the Extreme Value Theorem in real analysis.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in the behavior of continuous functions and their limits at infinity.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I have the following exercise:
It is given that $f:R \to R$ continuous and $\lim_{x \to -\infty}f(x)=-5$ & $\lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x)=5$.Show that there is a $M>0 \in R$ such that $|f(x)|<M, \forall x \in R$.Can you find a value for $M$?

Could you tell me if that what I have tried is right or what I could change??

$$\lim_{x \to -\infty}f(x)=-5:$$
$ \forall \epsilon>0 $ there is a $c>0$ such that $\forall x<-c \Rightarrow |f(x)-(-5)|<\epsilon \Rightarrow - \epsilon < f(x)+5< \epsilon \Rightarrow - \epsilon -5< f(x)< \epsilon -5$$ $(1)
$$\lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x)=5:$$
$ \forall \epsilon ' >0$ (also for $\epsilon ' =\epsilon$) there is a $c'>0$ such that $\forall x>c' \Rightarrow |f(x)-5|< \epsilon \Rightarrow -\epsilon < f(x) -5 < \epsilon \Rightarrow 5- \epsilon < f(x)< \epsilon +5 $ $(2)$

From the relations $(1)$ and $(2)$ we get $$- \epsilon -5<f(x)< \epsilon -5 < \epsilon +5$$
$$ - \epsilon +5 <f(x)< \epsilon +5$$
So $|f(x)|< \epsilon +5$.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
So $|f(x)|< \epsilon +5$.
This graph (clickable) begs to differ.

[GRAPH]oatb2hhtr1[/GRAPH]
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
This graph (clickable) begs to differ.

[GRAPH]oatb2hhtr1[/GRAPH]

So is the way I tried to solve it wrong, or just the value of $M$?
 
mathmari said:
\[\lim_{x \to -\infty}f(x)=-5:\]
$ \forall \epsilon>0 $ there is a $c>0$ such that $\forall x<-c \Rightarrow |f(x)-(-5)|<\epsilon \Rightarrow - \epsilon < f(x)+5< \epsilon \Rightarrow - \epsilon -5< f(x)< \epsilon -5$$ $(1)
$$\lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x)=5:$$
$ \forall \epsilon ' >0$ (also for $\epsilon ' =\epsilon$) there is a $c'>0$ such that $\forall x>c' \Rightarrow |f(x)-5|< \epsilon \Rightarrow -\epsilon < f(x) -5 < \epsilon \Rightarrow 5- \epsilon < f(x)< \epsilon +5 $ $(2)$
Up to here everything is correct. I recommend you take the graph as a counterexample and use it to find the error in the last part of your post. Pick a specific value of $\epsilon$, say, $\epsilon=1$, see if (1) and (2) are true and whether the conclusion you derive from them is true.

It is clear that the peak of the graph can be made as tall as possible, so it is not possible to give an upper bound in advance that works for all functions. Another hint is that you should use the fact that a continuous function on a closed segment is bounded (Wikipedia). The challenge is to find that closed segment.
 
mathmari said:
It is given that $f:R \to R$ continuous and $\lim_{x \to -\infty}f(x)=-5$ & $\lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x)=5$.Show that there is a $M>0 \in R$ such that $|f(x)|<M, \forall x \in R$.Can you find a value for $M$?
You do not have to be that abstract. Use the theorem: If f is continuous on [-n,n] then it is bounded there.

From the given:
$\left( {\exists {M_1} \in {\mathbb{Z}^ + }} \right)\left[ {x \geqslant {M_1} \Rightarrow \left| {f(x) - 5} \right| < 1} \right]$ & $\left( {\exists {M_2} \in {\mathbb{Z}^ + }} \right)\left[ {x \le -{M_2} \Rightarrow \left| {f(x) + 5} \right| < 1} \right]$

In each of those cases $|f(x)|<6$.

Now let $N=M_1+M_2$. The continuous function $f$ bounded on $[-N,N]$ by some $B>0$

So $\forall x\in\mathbb{R},~|f(x)|<B+6$
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Pick a specific value of $\epsilon$, say, $\epsilon=1$, see if (1) and (2) are true and whether the conclusion you derive from them is true.
For $\epsilon=1$ we get from the relation $(1)$ $-6 <f(x)<-4$, and from the relation $(2)$ we get $4<f(x)<6$.
Does this mean that we cannot say that $|f(x)|<6$?

Evgeny.Makarov said:
It is clear that the peak of the graph can be made as tall as possible, so it is not possible to give an upper bound in advance that works for all functions. Another hint is that you should use the fact that a continuous function on a closed segment is bounded (Wikipedia). The challenge is to find that closed segment.

To find that closed segment do we have to use the relations $(1)$ and $(2)$?
 
Plato said:
Now let $N=M_1+M_2$. The continuous function $f$ bounded on $[-N,N]$ by some $B>0$

So $\forall x\in\mathbb{R},~|f(x)|<B+6$

I got stuck...Could you explain me why |f(x)|<B+6 ?
 
mathmari said:
I got stuck...Could you explain me why |f(x)|<B+6 ?

You have three cases:
1) $x\in (-\infty, N)$ then $|f(x)+5|<1$ implies that $|f(x)|<6$

2) $x\in (N,\infty)$ then $|f(x)-5|<1$ implies that $|f(x)|<6$

3) $x\in [-N, N]$ implies that $|f(x)|<B$
 
Plato said:
You have three cases:
1) $x\in (-\infty, N)$ then $|f(x)+5|<1$ implies that $|f(x)|<6$

2) $x\in (N,\infty)$ then $|f(x)-5|<1$ implies that $|f(x)|<6$

3) $x\in [-N, N]$ implies that $|f(x)|<B$

Ok, I understand!

And could we also say $|f(x)|< \max \{6, B\}$ instead of $|f(x)|<B+6$ ?
 
  • #10
mathmari said:
And could we also say $|f(x)|< \max \{6, B\}$ instead of $|f(x)|<B+6$ ?

Well of course you can do do that, but why would you?
 
  • #11
Plato said:
Well of course you can do do that, but why would you?

Ok! I just wanted to know...

Thank you very much for your answer! :o
 
  • #12
It appears to me that all we can say is $M$ exists, we have no way of "finding a value for it" (such a function might have an arbitrarily large, but finite maximum, for example).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K