Why Continuous Functions Don't Preserve Cauchy Sequences

Click For Summary
Continuous functions do not necessarily preserve Cauchy sequences because they can diverge, as illustrated by the function f(x) = 1/x on (0,1), where a Cauchy sequence converging to 0 leads to f(x_n) diverging to infinity. The distinction lies in the need for uniform continuity, which ensures that a single delta can be applied to all points in an interval for a given epsilon. This uniformity is crucial for controlling the behavior of the function at the limits of the sequence. The discussion highlights the importance of uniform continuity in maintaining the Cauchy property across sequences. Understanding these concepts can clarify why not all continuous functions behave similarly regarding Cauchy sequences.
I like number
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Why is it that continuous functions do not necessarily preserve cauchy sequences.


Homework Equations


Epsilon delta definition of continuity
Sequential Characterisation of continuity


The Attempt at a Solution


I can't see why the proof that uniformly continuous functions preserve cauchy sequences doesn't hold for 'normal' continuous functions.
In particular the example of f(x) = 1/x on (0,1)
I have worked through the examples
http://www.mathcs.org/analysis/reals/cont/answers/fcont3.html
and here
http://www.mathcs.org/analysis/reals/cont/answers/contuni4.html

where they address this issue directly, but I can't get my head around it.

I understand that if we have a cauchy sequence converging to 0, then f(xn) is going to diverge to infinity, but I still can't see what the problem is.

Any explanation you can offer would be appreciated.

Kind regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I like number said:
I understand that if we have a cauchy sequence converging to 0, then f(xn) is going to diverge to infinity, but I still can't see what the problem is.

Recall that Cauchy sequences are bounded. So if \{f(x_n)\}_{n \in \mathbb{N}} diverges, then the sequence cannot be Cauchy. In particular, f does not take Cauchy sequences to Cauchy sequences.
 


The reason that we need uniform continuity is that we need to be able to find one \delta for each \epsilon that works for all x in a certain interval. This is because in the proof, we do a "double triangle inequality." So, if \{f(x_n)\} is a sequence of continuous functions that converges to f(x) for each x in the interval (a,b) then we want to show that \forall \epsilon \exists \delta such that |f(x_0) - f(x)| < \epsilon whenever |x_0 - x| < \delta. We do this by writting:
|f(x_0) - f(x)| = |f(x_0) - f_n(x_0) + f_n(x_0) - f_n(x) + f_n(x_0)-f(x)| \leq<br /> |f(x_0) - f_n(x_0)| + |f_n(x_0) - f_n(x)| + |f_n(x_0)-f(x)|

Now, since the sequence is Cauchy, we can control the outer two terms with a big enough n and make them both less than \epsilon / 3. So, we need to be able to ensure that |f_n(x) - f_n(x_0)| \leq \epsilon / 3 for every x such that |x_0-x|\leq \delta. The only way we can do this is by making f_n uniformly continuous.

As an example, consider the function f_n(x) = x^n on [0,1).
 


Thanks very much to you both.
I think I can see it more clearly now, (and a good nights sleep always helps too!).
I will continue to play around with these ideas and if I have any more questions I'll be back.

Thanks again
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K