Showing Value "a" for Continuous Function f(x) in a Closed Interval

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on demonstrating the existence of a value "a" for a continuous function f(x) within a closed interval such that for any arbitrary x, the condition f(x+a) - f(x) < e holds true, where e is a positive constant. The proof relies on the definition of continuity and the Heine-Cantor theorem, which asserts that continuity on a compact domain implies uniform continuity. The participants clarify that if the function is uniformly continuous, one can choose "a" as d/2, where d is derived from the uniform continuity definition. The conversation also touches on the convergence of Riemann sums for continuous functions on closed intervals.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of continuous functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with the Heine-Cantor theorem
  • Knowledge of uniform continuity
  • Basic concepts of Riemann sums and their convergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Heine-Cantor theorem in detail
  • Explore the implications of uniform continuity on function behavior
  • Investigate Riemann sums and their convergence for continuous functions
  • Learn about the definitions and properties of continuous functions in real analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in the properties of continuous functions and their applications in calculus.

Werg22
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
1
This is a simple question: given a continuous function, f(x), in a closed interval, how do we show that there is value "a" small enough such as for arbitrary x:

f(x+a) - f(x) < e

Where e lower bound is 0.

?

Thxs in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If [itex]x_0[/itex] is in the closed interval then the definition of "continuous" is that [itex]\lim_{x\rightarrow x_0} f(x)= f(x_0)[/itex]. That in turn means "given [itex]\epsilon> 0[/itex] there exist [itex]\delta> 0[/itex] such that if [itex]|x-x_0|< \delta[/itex] then [itex]|f(x)-f(x_0)|< \epsilon[/itex].
To get your result, let [itex]x_0= x[/itex] and [itex]x= x_0+ \delta[/itex]. Then your "a" is "[itex]\delta[/itex]", "e" is "[itex]\epsilon[/itex] and [itex]|f(x)- f(x_0)|<\epsilon[/itex] becomes |f(x+a)-f(x)|< e. Of course, it's still true without the absolute value since if f(x+a)- f(x) is negative it's still less than the positive e.
 
If the function is uniformly continuous, the proof is easy. This would mean that for any e>0, there is a d>0 such that |x-y|<d implies |f(x)-f(y)|<e for all x,y in the domain. So just pick your a as d/2.

It's a little more complicated to show this from just the assumption of continuity (which, remember, is a local property, where as you're looking for an a with a ceratin global property), but the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heine-Cantor_theorem" states that these definitions are equivalent if the domain is compact, which a closed interval is. If you can't just cite this theorem, there is a link to a proof on the wikipedia page.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mmh, yes, the existence of the 'a' for all x is assured by definition of uniform continuity + Heine-Cantor in the case [itex](X,d(x,y))=(\mathbb{R},|x-y |)[/itex].P.S. Halls, do you know how to write in italic w/o using Latex?
 
Last edited:
just subdivide your interval into unit length subintervals, then subintervals of length 1/10, then 1/100, and so on...assuming no subdivision ever has intervals on all of which the variation is less than epsilon, resulots in the existence of an infinite decimal, i.e. a real number, in our interval where the function is not continuous.
 
My question has been misunderstood... sorry the lack of clarity. What I meant is:

Let e and c be constants, for all x. Is there such a constant for which, regardless of x;

If within the interval [a,b]

(</= stands for inferior or equal)

f(x+e) </= a

then

f(x+e) - f(x) </= c


Additionally,

f(x+l) - f(x) ; if l < k < e

then

f(x+l) - f(x) < f(x+k) - f(k) < c


?

If there is, what is the proof?


This all has to do with a proof that all Riemann sums converge towards the same value when the span of its subdivision tends to 0. Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
I can't make any sense out of your last post, werg. If what you're trying to do is prove all Riemann sums converge to the same limit for continuous functions on a closed interval, you would want to start with the question we thought you asked and then answered.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so after a little thought I solved it. Sorry for the lack of clarity again, I tried my best to explain. N/P now :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K