Tough limit proof for a general f(x) and g(x)

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Amad27
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General Limit Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a limit proof involving two functions, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$, with specific properties near the point $x = 2$. Participants are tasked with finding a $\delta$ that ensures the combined limit condition $|f(x) + g(x) - 6| < \epsilon$ holds under certain constraints. The problem is framed within the context of calculus, specifically referencing a challenge from Spivak's textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines the properties of $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ and proposes a method to find $\delta$ based on bounding $|f(x) - 2|$ and $|g(x) - 4|$.
  • Another participant presents a detailed approach using two delta functions, $\delta_1(\varepsilon)$ and $\delta_2(\varepsilon)$, and computes their values to establish a minimum delta that satisfies the limit condition.
  • A later reply questions the reasoning behind the implication that $0 < |x - 2| < \delta_1(\epsilon/2)$ leads to $|f(x) - 2| < \epsilon/2$.
  • Several participants express confusion regarding the implications of the statements and seek clarification on the logical connections between the conditions and the derived inequalities.
  • One participant attempts to clarify the relationship between the computed delta and the conditions required for the limit to hold, emphasizing the correspondence between the arguments of the delta functions and the desired bounds on $|f(x) - 2|$.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the clarity of the implications drawn from the statements regarding the limits. There is ongoing confusion and requests for clarification, indicating that multiple interpretations or understandings of the problem exist.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of establishing the necessary conditions for the limit proof, with participants grappling with the implications of their mathematical reasoning and the definitions of the delta functions involved.

Amad27
Messages
409
Reaction score
1
Hello,

$f(x)$ and $g(x)$ have the following property: for all $\epsilon > 0$ and all $x$,
$$ \text{if} \space 0 < |x - 2| < \sin^2(\epsilon^2/9) + \epsilon \space \text{then} \space |f(x) - 2| < \epsilon$$
$$ \text{if} \space 0 < |x - 2| < \epsilon^2 \space \text{then} \space |g(x) - 4| < \epsilon$$

Find a $\delta$ such that:
(i) if $0 < |x-2| < \delta \space \text{then} \space |f(x) + g(x) - 6| < \epsilon$

This problem is from Spivak's calculus, so no wonder is it quite hard. I understand a few things.

The trick is to get $|f(x) - 2| < \epsilon/2$ and $|g(x) - 2| < \epsilon/2$

I need some help, as it is very tough to find a $\delta$ that will do. First should we bound $|x - 2| < c$ for some integer (positive) $c$?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's how I approached this problem. Naming

$$\begin{aligned} \delta_1(\varepsilon) & = \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{9} \right) + \varepsilon, \\ \delta_2 (\varepsilon) & = \varepsilon^2, \end{aligned}$$

we have that if $0 < |x-2| < \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right)$ then $|f(x) -2 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$. The same logic applies to $\delta_2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right)$. Computing them gives us

$$\begin{aligned} \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) & = \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{36} \right) + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}, \\ \delta_2 \left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) & = \frac{\varepsilon^2}{4}. \end{aligned}$$

Taking the minimum

$$\delta = \min \left\{ \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right), \delta_2 \left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) \right\} = \min \left\{ \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{36} \right) + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}, \frac{\varepsilon^2}{4} \right\}$$

ensures that $0 < |x-2| < \delta$ guarantees $|f(x) - 2 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$ and $|g(x) - 4 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$.

Therefore $0 < |x-2| < \delta$ implies that

$$|f(x) + g(x) -6| \leq |f(x) - 2| + |g(x) -4| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2} + \frac{\varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon.$$

But I'm not completely sure on this.
 
Fantini said:
Here's how I approached this problem. Naming

$$\begin{aligned} \delta_1(\varepsilon) & = \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{9} \right) + \varepsilon, \\ \delta_2 (\varepsilon) & = \varepsilon^2, \end{aligned}$$

we have that if $0 < |x-2| < \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right)$ then $|f(x) -2 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$. The same logic applies to $\delta_2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right)$. Computing them gives us

$$\begin{aligned} \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) & = \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{36} \right) + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}, \\ \delta_2 \left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) & = \frac{\varepsilon^2}{4}. \end{aligned}$$

Taking the minimum

$$\delta = \min \left\{ \delta_1 \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right), \delta_2 \left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2} \right) \right\} = \min \left\{ \sin^2 \left( \frac{\varepsilon^2}{36} \right) + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}, \frac{\varepsilon^2}{4} \right\}$$

ensures that $0 < |x-2| < \delta$ guarantees $|f(x) - 2 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$ and $|g(x) - 4 | < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$.

Therefore $0 < |x-2| < \delta$ implies that

$$|f(x) + g(x) -6| \leq |f(x) - 2| + |g(x) -4| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2} + \frac{\varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon.$$

But I'm not completely sure on this.
$$\delta_1(\epsilon) = \sin^2(\epsilon^2/9) + \epsilon$$How does the statement imply:

$0 < |x - 2| < \delta_1(\epsilon/2)$ then $|f(x) - 2| < \epsilon/2$?
 
I'm sorry, I didn't understand. How does what statement imply what? :(
 
Fantini said:
I'm sorry, I didn't understand. How does what statement imply what? :(

Sorry for being unclear! I meant from:

$0 < |x - 2| < \delta_1(\epsilon/2)$

How do you get:

$|f(x) - 2| < \epsilon/2$?
 
You compute $\delta_1(\varepsilon)$ so that $|f(x)-2|< \varepsilon$. From here you know that if you want $|f(x)-2| < h(\varepsilon)$ then you need to have $\delta_1(h(\varepsilon))$. You have a correspondence between the argument of $\delta_1(h(\varepsilon))$ and what $|f(x)-2|$ is less than. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K