Silly Limit Question: Can We Replace x with t?

  • Thread starter Thread starter epimorphic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
epimorphic
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have a rather silly limit question.

Consider
\begin{equation}
\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x)
\end{equation}
and assume it exists. Suppose now that
\begin{equation}
x = a\, t + b\, g(t),
\end{equation}
where a and b are constants and g(t) is a periodic function of t. Now, is it correct to simply replace \lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} by \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} as x \rightarrow \infty if and only if t \rightarrow \infty? That is, is it correct to write
\begin{equation}
\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x) = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} f(x(t))\;?
\end{equation}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. Consider x=e^{-t}. \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}f(x)=f(0), assuming that f(0) exists.
 
It depends on the form of g(t). Think of g(t)=tan t.
 
dalcde said:
No. Consider x=e^{-t}. \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}f(x)=f(0), assuming that f(0) exists.
This is not the same [type of] question I have asked.

Useful nucleus said:
It depends on the form of g(t). Think of g(t)=tan t.
I should have stated this more explicitly: \left|g(t)\right| < \infty, say \left|g(t)\right| = \sin(t), continuous, smooth and infinitely differentiable.
 
epimorphic said:
This is not the same [type of] question I have asked.

Sorry. Didn't read that.
 
Since the second term in the right hand side is always finite, then your assertion is correct.
 
One minor correction: 'a' must be a positive real number. Otherwise 'x' will go to negative infinity, or simply be bounded and periodic.

Also, this should hold for any bounded periodic function, be it infinitely differentiable, not differentiable at all, or even not continuous anywhere. In fact, it actually need only be bounded below, not above.

EDIT: *Any bounded function at all. There is no particular reason why it needs to be periodic.
 
This is because if g is bounded below by M, then bg is bounded below by bM. Since a is positive, at+bg \geq at+bM, and at+bM goes to positive infinity.
 
@Useful nucleus and alexfloo: Thanks!

You are are right, "a" has to be a positive real number and yes the only requirement on g(t) should be as you have stated.
 
Back
Top