Understanding Infinite Limits: Clarifying the Definition and Misconceptions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of infinite limits in calculus, specifically addressing the interpretation of the formal definition provided in a textbook. Participants explore the implications of the definition and clarify misconceptions regarding the behavior of functions near limits.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the definition implies that for any M close to the limit, a corresponding δ can be found that ensures f(x) is closer to the limit.
  • Another participant asserts that the definition indicates no finite number can be the limit, as there will always be x values within δ that exceed M.
  • A different participant challenges this interpretation, arguing that it is not correct to say no finite number is the limit and emphasizes the need for clarity in the definition regarding the behavior of f(x) within δ balls.
  • This participant proposes that for any chosen large M, there exists a δ such that all x values within that δ ball will exceed M, cautioning against potential misinterpretations of the definition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the definition of infinite limits, with no consensus reached on the implications of the formal definition or the behavior of functions near these limits.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the definition of infinite limits and the importance of precise language in mathematical discourse. Participants note that the interpretation of δ and M can lead to misunderstandings.

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5
I have attached this definition that my book provides. My question is does that part "for each M > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that f(x) > M, mean that whenever you M close to the limit, you can find a δ that will give M1 that is closer to the limit?
 

Attachments

  • PF.JPG
    PF.JPG
    31.8 KB · Views: 598
  • PF2.JPG
    PF2.JPG
    5.9 KB · Views: 511
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is there more information that is needed? Because that is all the information contained in the book.
 
No, just don't expect people to be sitting around waiting to answer your question! To get a response within 24 or 48 hours is pretty good.

Does that part "for each M > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that f(x) > M, mean that whenever you M close to the limit, you can find a δ that will give M1 that is closer to the limit?
Not exactly. It means that no finite number, M, can be the limit because, for any [itex]\delta> 0[/itex] there exist x within [itex]|x- c|< \delta[/itex] such that f(x)> M.
 
You are wrong in a couple of ways halls of ivy

1. "no finite number is the limit." that is not correct. it is implied, but it is not the same

2. "there is some x in the delta ball." that would just mean the function is not bounded near there. You are allowing f to jump back down as often as it wants.

The definition needs to say that within these delta balls, all x values land above M. Choose M as large as you want, then there is such a delta ball. And all of us, even me, need to be careful about the order in which we say these things. What I said just now could easily be misinterpreted.

So, to put it better, Pick any M value, large as you want, I dare you. Then I promise you a delta ball. You can pick any x in that delta ball, and I guarantee that x will land above M. That's why in the picture they shaded it blue, they're trying to suggest all x vaules inside will work.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K