Uniform convergence of functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of uniform convergence of functions, particularly focusing on the sequence of functions defined as ##f_n(x) = x^n##. Participants explore the implications of uniform convergence on the continuity of limit functions, providing examples and counterexamples to illustrate their points.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the limit function ##f(x)## is discontinuous at ##x=1##, despite all functions ##f_n(x)## being continuous.
  • One participant argues that at ##x=1##, the sequence ##1^n## does not converge, suggesting a lack of convergence at that point.
  • Another participant presents the limit function as a piecewise function, highlighting the discontinuity at ##x=1## where it jumps from ##0## to ##1##.
  • A participant introduces an analogy involving walking a unit square, illustrating that while the path length remains constant, the approach to the diagonal does not imply uniform convergence.
  • Some participants assert that the sequence ##x^n## is not Cauchy on the interval ##[0,1]##, leading to the conclusion that the limit is not continuous.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of uniform convergence, with some participants questioning its necessity versus sufficiency in relation to continuity of limit functions.
  • One participant clarifies their position regarding uniform convergence, stating that they did not claim it was necessary, only sufficient.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of uniform convergence for continuity of limit functions. There is no consensus on whether the limit function's continuity can be established without uniform convergence, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the Cauchy condition.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions of convergence and continuity, which may not be universally agreed upon. The discussion also highlights the complexity of convergence in metric spaces, particularly in relation to Hausdorff spaces.

chwala
Gold Member
Messages
2,828
Reaction score
425
TL;DR
Kindly see attached (interest is on highlighted in red.)

Where is the discontinuity in the given function or is discontinuity as a result of having two different limits? i.e sequence converging in opposite directions in respect to the given domains.
I need clarification on this part.
1708632535701.png
 

Attachments

  • 1708632519025.png
    1708632519025.png
    79.6 KB · Views: 121
Physics news on Phys.org
The limit function, ##f(x)##, in that counterexample is clearly discontinuous at ##x=1##. Yet, all the functions ##f_n(x)## are continuous.
 
I think a bit clear now ... if i consider the sequence; ##1^n## will always be ##= 1## as ##n→∞## therefore sequence at that point remains the same hence no convergence if i may say that at ##x=1##.
 
##f_n(x)=x^n## are continuous functions.
$$
\displaystyle{f(x):=\lim_{n \to \infty}f_n(x)=\lim_{n \to \infty}x^n}=\begin{cases}0&\text{ if }0\leq x< 1\\1&\text{ if }x=1\end{cases}
$$
##f(x)## is not continuous since it jumps from ##0## for all values left of ##x=1## to ##1## for ##x=1.## This is a discontinuity.

Another example:

If we walk the unit square from bottom left to top right then we have to walk 2 units.
This does not change if we walk half a step to the right, then half a step to the top, another half of a step to the right, and finally another half to the top. That makes 2 units in total.
This does not change if we walk a quarter of a step to the right, then a quarter of a step to the top, another quarter, and so on until we end up at the top right corner. Still 2 units in total.
This does not change if we walk an eighth of a step to the right, another eighth of a step to the top etc.
No matter how small our steps will be. As long as we walk only to the right and to the top, we will have to walk 2 units in total. Nevertheless, we constantly approach the diagonal of the unit square which is of length ##\sqrt{2}\neq 2.## Hence, no matter how close we get pointwise to the diagonal, our path is of length 2 whereas we get pointwise closer to the diagonal of length ##\sqrt{2}.##
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: chwala
Notice ##x^n## is not Cauchy on ##[0,1]##. Since the sequences don't converge uniformly, the limit is not continuous. And, strictly speaking, as a whole, the sequence doesn't converge to different limits. This isn't possible in a Hausdorff space, and every metric space is Hausdorff.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: chwala
WWGD said:
Notice ##x^n## is not Cauchy on ##[0,1]##. Since the sequences don't converge uniformly, the limit is not continuous.
What's the definition of uniform convergence of a sequence?

Also, the functions don't converge uniformly on ##[0,1)##, yet the limit function is continuous on that domain.
 
PeroK said:
What's the definition of uniform convergence of a sequence?

Also, the functions don't converge uniformly on ##[0,1)##, yet the limit function is continuous on that domain.
I know what it means. I've never said uniforms convergence is necessary. Only that it's sufficient.
 
WWGD said:
I know what it means. I've never said uniforms convergence is necessary. Only that it's sufficient.
Well, no, you said it was necessary:
WWGD said:
Since the sequences don't converge uniformly, the limit is not continuous.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K