Use Graph To Investigate Limit

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycmathguy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph Limit
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around investigating the limits of a function f(x) as x approaches specific values, using a graph to analyze the behavior of the function. The subject area is calculus, specifically focusing on the concept of limits and the implications of holes in the graph.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the limits for two specific questions, questioning the impact of holes in the graph on the existence of limits. Some participants attempt to clarify the reasoning behind their conclusions about the limits, while others challenge these conclusions based on the behavior of the function as it approaches the point of interest.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on how to interpret the graph and the limits. There is recognition of correct conclusions, but also an emphasis on the need for accurate reasoning. Multiple interpretations of the limits are being explored, particularly regarding the influence of holes in the graph.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working with specific questions that involve limits and are referencing a graph that has been added to the discussion. There is an acknowledgment that the understanding of limits may differ in higher-level calculus courses.

nycmathguy
Homework Statement
Graphs and Limits
Relevant Equations
Piecewise Functions
For questions 24 and 26, Use the graph to investigate limit of f(x) as x→c. If the limit does not exist, explain why.

Question 24

For (a), the limit is 1.

For (b), the limit is cannot be determined due to the hole at (c, 2).

For (c), LHL does not = RHL.

I conclude the limit does not exist.

You say?

Question 26

For (a), the limit is 2.

For (b), the limit cannot be determined due to the hole at (c, 3).

For (c), LHL does not = RHL.

I conclude the limit does not exist.

You say?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210613-144516_Drive.jpg
    Screenshot_20210613-144516_Drive.jpg
    8.5 KB · Views: 162
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
nycmathguy said:
You say?
Did you forget to post the graph for these questions?
Also, just because there is a hole in the graph doesn't mean that a limit doesn't exist.
 
Mark44 said:
Did you forget to post the graph for these questions?
Also, just because there is a hole in the graph doesn't mean that a limit doesn't exist.

Picture has been added.
 
Ques. 24
nycmathguy said:
For (b), the limit is cannot be determined due to the hole at (c, 2).
No, this is incorrect. The presence or absence of a hole doesn't affect the limit.
As x approaches c from the right, what are the function values doing?

nycmathguy said:
I conclude the limit does not exist.
This is the correct conclusion, but you've based it on faulty reasoning.

Ques. 26
nycmathguy said:
For (a), the limit is 2.

For (b), the limit cannot be determined due to the hole at (c, 3).
No to both. As x approaches c from the left, what value are the function values approaching? The fact that the point (c, 2) is on the graph has nothing to do with what the limit might be.
As x approaches c from the right, what are the function values doing, again ignoring the point at (c, 2)?

nycmathguy said:
I conclude the limit does not exist.
Correct conclusion but based on faulty reasoning.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nycmathguy
Mark44 said:
Ques. 24No, this is incorrect. The presence or absence of a hole doesn't affect the limit.
As x approaches c from the right, what are the function values doing?

This is the correct conclusion, but you've based it on faulty reasoning.

Ques. 26No to both. As x approaches c from the left, what value are the function values approaching? The fact that the point (c, 2) is on the graph has nothing to do with what the limit might be.
As x approaches c from the right, what are the function values doing, again ignoring the point at (c, 2)?

Correct conclusion but based on faulty reasoning.

Let me reply to yours one at a time from top to bottom.

1. As x tends to c from the right, f(x) goes to a height of 2.

2. Let me try 26 again.

As x tends to c from the left, f(x) goes to a height of 1.

As x tends to c from the right, f(x) goes to a height of 3.

Since the LHL does = THE RHL, the limit for f(x) does not exist.

You now say?
 
They're all fine now.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nycmathguy
Mark44 said:
They're all fine now.

This makes me feel better. I am slowly getting this limits stuff. I also know that limits is calculus 3 is very different. I am ok so far in the textbook.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K