Solved: Proving Uniform Continuity of Unique Continuous Function on A

varygoode
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Uniform Continuity

Homework Statement



Let [tex]A \subset \mathbb{R}^n[/tex] and let [tex]f: A \mapsto \mathbb{R}^m[/tex] be uniformly continuous. Show that there exists a unique continuous function [tex]g: \bar{A} \mapsto \mathbb{R}^m[/tex] such that [tex]g(x)=f(x) \ \forall \ x \in A[/tex].

Homework Equations



The definition for uniform continuity I am using is as follows:

Let [tex]f: A \subset \mathbb{R}^n \mapsto \mathbb{R}^m[/tex]. Then [tex]f[/tex] is uniformly continuous on [tex]A[/tex] if [tex]\forall \ \ \varepsilon > 0 \ \ \exists \ \ \delta > 0 \ \ s.t. \ \ \Vert f(x) \ - \ f(y) \Vert < \varepsilon \ \ \forall \ \ x, \ y \ \ \in A \ \ s.t. \ \ \Vert x - y \Vert < \delta[/tex].

The Attempt at a Solution



I've got to admit, I think I'm pretty clueless about this one. I was thinking about some function

[tex]$ g(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}x,&\mbox{ if }<br /> x\in \bar{A} \backslash A\\f(x), & \mbox{ if } x\in A\end{array}\right $[/tex].​

But I'm not even sure if I'm allowed to do that or if it meets the criteria. Any help leading to a correct proof would be superb, thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
g(x) = x (on the boundary) does not satisfy the criteria. Suppose A = [0,1), x = 1, f(1) = 10 vs. g(1) = 1.
 
If x is in the closure of A, then there exist a sequence of points in A converging to x. What should f(x) be?
 
EnumaElish said:
g(x) = x (on the boundary) does not satisfy the criteria. Suppose A = [0,1), x = 1, f(1) = 10 vs. g(1) = 1.

I'm not exactly sure where you got the value for f(1) since I never gave f(x) a definition, but I'll go with you on it.

HallsofIvy said:
If x is in the closure of A, then there exist a sequence of points in A converging to x. What should f(x) be?

Hmm... here's what I'm thinking now:

If [tex]x \in \bar{A}, \ \ \exists[/tex] some sequence [tex](x_k) \in A[/tex] s.t. [tex]\lim_{\substack{k \rightarrow \infty}} (x_k) = x[/tex]. Then [tex]f(x) = \lim_{\substack{k \rightarrow \infty}} f(x_k)[/tex] by continuity. So I'm thinking I can let [tex]g(x) = \lim_{\substack{k \rightarrow \infty}} f(x_k), \[/tex] where [tex](x_k) \rightarrow x[/tex]. Then that is continuous since:
[tex] \begin{equation*}<br /> \begin{split}<br /> \Vert g(x) - g(y) \Vert &= \Vert \left( \lim_{\substack{k \rightarrow \infty}} f(x_k) \right) - \left( \lim_{\substack{k \rightarrow \infty}} f(y_k) \right) \Vert \\<br /> &= \Vert f(x) - f(y) \Vert \\ &\leq \varepsilon \ \ \forall \ \Vert x - y \Vert \leq \delta<br /> \end{split}<br /> \end{equation*}[/tex]
(by uniform continuity of [tex]f[/tex]). Thus [tex]g(x)[/tex] is a continuous function satisfying the criteria.
 
I think you should use the triangle inequality.
 
EnumaElish said:
I think you should use the triangle inequality.

Use it where? Are you responding to my response to you or my response to Ivy? (Or both?)
 
It's even simpler than that:

g is continuous at x if for every [itex]\epsilon[/itex] > 0 there is [itex]\delta[/itex] > 0 such that |x-xk| < [itex]\delta[/itex] implies |g(x)-g(xk)| = |g(x)-f(xk)| < [itex]\epsilon[/itex].

Since xk ---> x, I know that for any [itex]\delta[/itex], I can find N1 such that k > N1 implies ...

And since by definition f(xk) ---> g(x), I know that for any [itex]\epsilon[/itex], I can find N2 such that k > N2 implies ...

Let N = max{N1, N2}, then for k > N, ...

Uniqueness follows from uniqueness of limit.
 
Last edited:
Thanks so much EnumaElish, this problem is solved.
 
Do you mind posting your proof so it will be a reference to others?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K