Why the definition of limit is often written

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mahmoud2011
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Limit
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of limits in real analysis, specifically the different forms in which the definition can be expressed. Participants explore the implications of using one form over another and the conditions under which limits may or may not exist, touching on concepts from topology.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the limit definition includes the condition "x ∈ I - {c}" instead of simply stating "0 < |x - c| < δ" and whether this affects the existence of limits.
  • Another participant asserts that both forms of the limit definition are equivalent and expresses a preference for the simpler version.
  • A different participant seeks to prove the equivalence of the two definitions and asks for clarification on the implications of undefined points in the context of limits.
  • One participant discusses the implications of topology on the definition of limits, suggesting that the existence of limits may not be affected by points where the function is undefined, depending on the topology used.
  • Another participant expresses a lack of familiarity with topology and requests to avoid using topological terms in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of the conditions in the limit definition. While some agree on the equivalence of the definitions, others raise concerns about the impact of undefined points on limit existence, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to topology and its relation to limit definitions, which may not be fully understood by all participants, leading to potential limitations in the discussion's depth.

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 .
 

Similar threads

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