Why is it fine to assume .5 | x - 4 | < e in an epsilon-delta proof?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bjgawp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of assuming the inequality .5 | x - 4 | < e in the context of an epsilon-delta proof related to limits in calculus. Participants explore the implications of this assumption and its connection to the definition of limits.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the assumption that .5 | x - 4 | < e is valid, expressing concern that it may not hold true.
  • Another participant argues that the inequality |√x - 2| ≤ 0.5 |x - 4| implies that if |x - 4| < 2ε, then |√x - 2| < ε, thus supporting the assumption under certain conditions.
  • A different participant seeks clarification on how the inequality |√x - 2| ≤ 0.5 |x - 4| leads to |x - 4| < 2ε without assuming the original inequality first.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of fixing ε as a positive number and explains how the definition of a limit applies to the problem at hand.
  • Another participant notes that the peculiar nature of the last line in the proof is due to the method of proving limits, highlighting the reversibility of steps in the proof process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the assumption .5 | x - 4 | < e, with some supporting it under specific conditions while others question its legitimacy. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the assumption's applicability.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the definition of limits and the conditions under which the inequalities hold, indicating that the discussion is contingent on specific mathematical assumptions and definitions.

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"!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
23K