Why can we assume 0.5|x - 4| < ε in epsilon-delta proofs?

  • Level: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bjgawp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
4 replies · 4K views
bjgawp
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Hey there everyone. I was looking at an epsilon-delta proof I did and realized that I wasn't exactly sure why one of my statements was true:

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7356/proofmy5.jpg

On the third last line, why is it fine to assume that .5 | x - 4 | < e is true? Isn't there a chance that .5 | x - 4 | may be greater than e?

Thanks in advance!

Edit: Hmm, wonder why the IMG tags don't work ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
it's not okay to assume that.The inequality [tex]\left|\sqrt{x}-2\right|\leq \frac{1}{2} \left|\ x - 4 \right|\[/tex] shows that if you restrict the x-values so that [tex]\left|\ x - 4\right|\ <2\epsilon[/tex] for the given [tex]\epsilon[/tex], then you get

[tex]\left|\sqrt{x}-2\right|\leq \frac{1}{2} \left|\ x - 4 \right|\ < \frac{1}{2} (2\epsilon) =\epsilon[/tex]

Also, the last line, 'And since . . .' is a bit weird. Remember that you're showing that such a delta exists in the first place.
 
Last edited:
How does [tex]\left|\sqrt{x}-2\right|\leq \frac{1}{2} \left|\ x - 4 \right|\[/tex] show that [tex]\left|\ x - 4\right|\ <2\epsilon[/tex] without assuming [tex]\frac{1}{2} \left|\ x - 4 \right|\ < \epsilon[/tex] first? Sorry. I don't see how the first inequality connects with it being less than epsilon. Thanks for the help!

Oh and yeah, I typed this up haphazardly without thinking what I meant by the last line. Thanks again!
 
remember that you fixed [tex]\epsilon[/tex] as a positive number.

the inequality shows that IF you make [tex]\left|\ x - 4\right|\ < \epsilon[/tex] , THEN you get [tex]\left|\sqrt{x}-2\right|\<\epsilon[/tex].

Read over the definition of a limit carefully and see how it applies to this particular problem:

We say that [tex]\lim_{x\to\\a}f(x)=v[/tex] whenever,

for all [tex]\epsilon > 0[/tex], there is some [tex]\delta >0[/tex] such that,

whenever we have [tex]0<\left|\ x-a \right|\ < \delta[/tex], it follows that [tex]\left|\ f(x) - v\right|\ < \epsilon[/tex]
 
The reason that last line seems a bit "peculiar" is that it is really a peculiarity of the way we do proofs of limits.

The definition of limit requires that we show that, for a specific [itex]\delta[/itex], if [itex]|x-a|< \delta[/itex], then [itex]|f(x)- L|< \epsilon[/itex]. But what we do is work the other way- assuming a value of [itex]\epsilon[/itex], we calculate the necessary [itex]\delta[/itex]. The point is that every step is "reversible"- you could start from, in this case, |x-4|< [itex]\delta[/itex] and, by just going through the derivation "in reverse" arrive at [itex]|\sqrt{x}- 2|< \epsilon[/itex].

That's sometimes referred to as "synthetic" proof. Again, we go from the conclusion we want to the hypothesis- but it is crucial that every step be "reversible"!