Why the definition of limit is often written

  • Thread starter Thread starter mahmoud2011
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Limit
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition of limits in real analysis, specifically referencing Ethan D. Bloch's formulation. The definition states that for a function f defined on an open interval I excluding a point c, the limit L exists if for every ε>0, there is a δ>0 such that if x is in I excluding c and |x-c| < δ, then |f(x)-L| < ε. Participants debate the equivalence of this definition with a simpler form, 0<|x-c|<δ, and explore implications regarding the existence of limits when functions are undefined at certain points. The conversation also touches on topological definitions of limits as presented in Johnson and Kiokemeister's 4th edition.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of real analysis concepts, particularly limits.
  • Familiarity with ε-δ definitions of limits.
  • Basic knowledge of open intervals in the context of real numbers.
  • Introductory topology concepts, although not required for beginners.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the ε-δ definition of limits in detail using "Real Analysis" by H.L. Royden.
  • Explore the relationship between limits and open sets in topology through "Topology" by James Munkres.
  • Investigate the implications of undefined points in limit definitions in "Principles of Mathematical Analysis" by Walter Rudin.
  • Review alternative definitions of limits in various mathematical texts, including Johnson and Kiokemeister's work.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those focusing on real analysis and topology, as well as self-learners seeking a deeper understanding of limit definitions and their implications.

mahmoud2011
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
Why the definition of limit is often written in this form also it can be more easy ?
in Real numbers and Real Analysis by Ethan.D.Bloch : writes the definition :
let I\subseteqℝ be an open interval ,c \inI , let f:I-{c} → ℝ be a function and let L\inℝ , L is the limit of f as x goes to c ,

if for any ε>0 , there exists δ>0 such that x \in I-{c} and |x-c| < δ imply |f(x)-L| < ε

some questions concerned here , why he don't write instead of the Bold part this simply

0<|x-c| < δ imply |f(x)-L| < ε

in the first definition does the inequality mean that there is some x satisfy it such that x \notin I ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You can write both things. They are equivalent. I have personally always worked with the second definition (i.e. the one with 0<|x-a|<δ ). But either one is good.
 
Can I prove that the two definitions are equivalent.
And please what about the second question ?
 
Supose we are talking about the "space" of all functions on the the interval [0,1]. Do we want lim_{x \rightarrow 0}f(x) to fail to exist just because the set \{x:0 &lt; |x-0|&lt; d \} contains points where f is undefined? If you define the topology of [0,1] so that [1,\delta) is an open set, then Bloch's definition allows the limit to exist.

If you use the usual definition of "open set" (as defined on the whole real number line) then the definitions are equivalent.

As I recall, Johnson and Kiokemeister 4th edition gave a definition of limit that was based on topology. They said something like:

"The limit of f(x) as x approaches a is equal to L" means that for each open interval R containing L there is an open interval D containing a such that f(D-{a}) is a subset of R.

However, as I stated this definition, if looks like a failure of f to be defined at various points in D would not prevent the limit from existing. I don't know whether J&K's exact wording prevented that.
 
Last edited:
Sorry , But I haven't studied topology yet , I am a self learner , also , I have Munkres' Topology , But I didn't read it , Because I still study some set theory , so please I don't want term Topology .
 
Relativistic Momentum, Mass, and Energy Momentum and mass (...), the classic equations for conserving momentum and energy are not adequate for the analysis of high-speed collisions. (...) The momentum of a particle moving with velocity ##v## is given by $$p=\cfrac{mv}{\sqrt{1-(v^2/c^2)}}\qquad{R-10}$$ ENERGY In relativistic mechanics, as in classic mechanics, the net force on a particle is equal to the time rate of change of the momentum of the particle. Considering one-dimensional...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K