More on the limit of functions

-

 There are a few variations of limits.



Definition (Divergence of a function)

If the function \(f(x)\) does not converge to any value as \(x \to a\), we say that \(f(x)\) diverges as \(x \to a\). In particular, if the value of \(f(x)\) increases arbitrarily as \(x \to a\), we say that \(f(x)\) diverges to positive infinity and write

\[\lim_{x\to a}f(x) = \infty.\]

If the value of \(f(x)\) is negative and its absolute value increases arbitrarily, we say that \(f(x)\) diverges to negative infinity and write

\[\lim_{x\to a}f(x) = -\infty.\]

Example. Consider the function

\[f(x) = \frac{1}{(x - 1)^2}\]

defined on \(\mathbb{R}\setminus\{1\}\). We have

\[\lim_{x \to 1}f(x) = \infty.\]

You should verify this by drawing a graph. □

There are a few variants of the notion of limit.

Definition (Left and right limits)

  1. We define the left limit of the function \(f(x)\) at \(x=a\) \[\lim_{x \to a -0}f(x) = \alpha\] if the following is satisfied
    • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists \(\delta > 0\) such that for any \(x\in\text{dom}(f)\), if \(0 < a - x < \delta\) then \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \varepsilon\)
    This mean \(x\) approaches \(a\) from the left (so ``\(x < a\)'' is kept).
  2. We define the right limit of the function \(f(x)\) at \(x=a\) \[\lim_{x \to a +0}f(x) = \alpha\] if the following is satisfied
    • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists \(\delta > 0\) such that for any \(x\in\text{dom}(f)\), if \(0 < x - a < \delta\) then \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \varepsilon\).
    This mean \(x\) approaches \(a\) from the right (so ``\(a < x\)'' is kept).
Remark. We write \(x \to +0\) instead of \(x \to 0+0\). Similarly \(x\to -0\) rather than \(x \to 0-0\). □

Example. Consider the function 
\[f(x) = \frac{x(x + 1)}{|x|}\]
defined on \(\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}\). 
If \(x > 0\), we have
\[f(x) = \frac{x(x + 1)}{x} = x + 1\]
so that
\[\lim_{x \to +0}f(x) = 1.\]
If \(x < 0\), we have
\[f(x) = \frac{x(x + 1)}{-x} = -x - 1\]
so that
\[\lim_{x \to -0}f(x) = -1.\]
□

Example. For the function \(f(x) = \frac{1}{x}\) defined on \(\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}\), we have
\[ \begin{eqnarray*} \lim_{x\to +0}f(x) &=& \infty,\\ \lim_{x\to -0}f(x) &=& -\infty. \end{eqnarray*} \]
□

Definition (Limits at \(\pm \infty\))

  1. We define the limit at \(x \to \infty\) \[\lim_{x \to \infty}f(x) = \alpha\] if the following is satisfied
    • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists \(\delta > 0\) such that for any \(x\in\text{dom}(f)\), if \(x > \delta\) then \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \varepsilon\).
  2. We define the limit at \(x \to -\infty\) \[\lim_{x \to -\infty}f(x) = \alpha\] if the following is satisfied
    • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists \(\delta > 0\) such that for any \(x\in\text{dom}(f)\), if \(x < -\delta\) then \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \varepsilon\).

Theorem

Let \(f(x)\) be a function defined on the open interval \(I = (a, b)\) \((a < b)\) such that \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \alpha\) \((\alpha \in\mathbb{R})\).
  1. For a given \(c\in\mathbb{R}\), if \(f(x) \geq c\) for all \(x\in I\), then \(\alpha \geq c\).
  2. For a given \(d\in\mathbb{R}\), if \(f(x) \leq d\) for all \(x\in I\), then \(\alpha \leq d\).
Proof. We prove only part 1 and prove it by contradiction. Part 2 is similar.
Suppose \(\alpha < c\) and let \(\varepsilon = c - \alpha > 0\). Since \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \alpha\), we can find \(\delta > 0\) such that \(0 < x - a < \delta\) implies \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \varepsilon\). But then \(f(x) < \alpha + \varepsilon = c\), which is a contradiction. ■

Theorem

Let \(f(x)\) be a function defined on an interval that includes \(x= a\).
  1. If \(\lim_{x\to a}f(x) = \alpha\) exists, then the corresponding left and right limits also exist and \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \lim_{x\to a-0}f(x) = \alpha\).
  2. If both \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x)\) and \(\lim_{x\to a-0}f(x)\) exist and \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \lim_{x\to a-0}f(x) = \alpha\), then \(\lim_{x\to a}f(x) = \alpha\).
Proof. Exercise. ■

Example. Let us prove the following:
\[e = \lim_{x\to 0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}} = \lim_{x\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{x}\right)^x  = \lim_{x\to -\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{x}\right)^x.\]
Before proving this, recall that we have
\[\lim_{n\to \infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^n = e\]
where \(n = 1, 2, 3, \cdots\) (i.e., natural numbers).

In order to show \(e = \lim_{x\to 0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}}\), we need to show \(e = \lim_{x\to +0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}}\) and \(e = \lim_{x\to -0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}}\). By changing variables \(x = \frac{1}{y}\), \(\lim_{x\to +0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}} = \lim_{y\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{y}\right)^y\) and \(\lim_{x\to -0}(1 + x)^{\frac{1}{x}} = \lim_{y\to -\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{y}\right)^y\). Furthermore,  by changing variables \(y = -t\), assuming \(t  > 1\), we have
\[ \begin{eqnarray*} \lim_{y\to -\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{y}\right)^y &=& \lim_{t\to \infty}\left(1 - \frac{1}{t}\right)^{-t}\\ &=& \lim_{t\to \infty}\left(\frac{t}{t-1}\right)^{t}\\ &=& \lim_{t\to \infty}\left(\frac{t}{t-1}\right)^{t-1}\left(\frac{t}{t-1}\right). \end{eqnarray*} \]
Since \(\lim_{t\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{t-1}\right) = 1\), we can see that we only need to show \(e = \lim_{x\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{x}\right)^{x}\).

For any \(x \geq 1\), we can find \(n\in\mathbb{N}\) such that
\[n\leq x \leq n+1.\]
Then we have
\[1 < 1 + \frac{1}{n+1} \leq 1 + \frac{1}{x} \leq 1 + \frac{1}{n}.\]
And hence,
\[\left(1 + \frac{1}{n+1}\right)^{n} \leq \left(1 + \frac{1}{x}\right)^{x} \leq \left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^{n+1}.\]
Now,
\[\lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{n+1}\right)^{n} = \lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{\left(1 + \frac{1}{n+1}\right)^{n+1}}{\left(1 + \frac{1}{n+1}\right)} = e,\]
and
\[\lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^{n+1} = \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^{n}\left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right) = e.\]
Therefore, by the Squeeze Theorem,
\[\lim_{x\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{1}{x}\right)^{x} = e.\]
□

In a previous post, we have seen Cauchy's theorem for convergence of sequences (i.e., a Cauchy sequence converges and vice versa). 
A similar result hold for the convergence of functions.

Theorem (Cauchy criterion for the right limit of a function)

Let \(f(x)\) be a function on \(I = (a,b]\). The right limit \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x)\) exists if and only if the following condition is satisfied:
  • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists a \(\delta > 0\) such that for all \(x, y\in I\), if \(a < x < a + \delta\) and \(a < y < a + \delta\) then \(|f(x) - f(y)| < \varepsilon\).     (\(\star\))
In a logical form:
\[\forall \varepsilon > 0, \exists \delta > 0, \forall x,y\in I ~ (x,y \in (a,a+\delta) \implies |f(x) - f(y)|< \varepsilon).\]
Remark. Similarly, the left limit \(\lim_{x\to b-0}f(x)\) exists if and only if
  • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists a \(\delta > 0\) such that for all \(x, y\in I\), if \(b - \delta < x < b\) and \(b -\delta < y < b\) then \(|f(x) - f(y)| < \varepsilon\).
The limit \(\lim_{x\to\infty}f(x)\) exists if and only if
  • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists a \(\delta > 0\) such that for all \(x, y\in I\), if \(x > \delta\) and \(y > \delta\) then \(|f(x) - f(y)| < \varepsilon\).
The limit \(\lim_{x\to-\infty}f(x)\) exists if and only if
  • For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists a \(\delta > 0\) such that for all \(x, y\in I\), if \(x < -\delta\) and \(y < -\delta\) then \(|f(x) - f(y)| < \varepsilon\).
□
Proof. (\(\Rightarrow\)) Suppose \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x)\) exists. Then there exists some real number \(\alpha\) such that \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \alpha\). For any \(\varepsilon > 0\), there exists \(\delta > 0\) such that, for all \(x\in I\), if \(a < x < a + \delta\) then \(|f(x) - \alpha| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}\). Let \(x\) and \(y\) be arbitrary real numbers such that \(a < x < a + \delta\) and \(a < y < a + \delta\). Then
\[ \begin{eqnarray*} |f(x) - f(y)| & = & |f(x) - \alpha + \alpha - f(y)|\\ &\leq &|f(x) - \alpha| + |f(y) - \alpha|\\ &<& \frac{\varepsilon}{2} + \frac{\varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon. \end{eqnarray*} \]
Therefore the condition (\(\star\)) is satisfied.

(\(\Leftarrow\)) Suppose (\(\star\)) is satisfied. Let us define a sequence \(\{a_n\}\) by \(a_n = a + \frac{b-a}{n}\), \(n\in\mathbb{N}\). For any \(\varepsilon > 0\),  choose a \(\delta > 0\) satisfying (\(\star\)). By Archimedes' principle, we can find an \(N\in \mathbb{N}\) such that \(N\delta > b - a\). Then for any \(n \geq N\), \(a_n - a  = \frac{b-a}{n} < \frac{b-a}{N} < \delta\) so that \(a < a_n < a + \delta\). Therefore by (\(\star\)), for all \(n, m > N\), \(|f(a_n) - f(a_m)| < \varepsilon\) so that \(\{f(a_n)\}\) is a Cauchy sequence, and hence this sequence converges: \(\lim_{n\to\infty}f(a_n) = \alpha\) for some \(\alpha \in \mathbb{R}\).

Now, let us show that \(\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \alpha\). By (\(\star\)), for any \(\varepsilon > 0\), we can find \(\delta > 0\) such that for all \(x,y \in (a, a+\delta)\), \(|f(x) - f(y)|< \frac{\varepsilon}{2}\). Also, since \(\lim_{n\to\infty}f(a_n) = \alpha\), we can find an \(N\in\mathbb{N}\) such that for all \(n \geq N\), \(|f(a_n) - \alpha| < \frac{\varepsilon}{2}\). If \(a < x < a + \delta\), choose \(n \geq N\) such that \(a < a_n < a+\delta\). Then
\[ \begin{eqnarray*} |f(x) - \alpha| &=& |f(x) - f(a_n) + f(a_n) - \alpha|\\ &\leq&|f(x) - f(a_n)| + |f(a_n) - \alpha|\\ &<& \frac{\varepsilon}{2} + \frac{\varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon. \end{eqnarray*} \]
Therefore,
\[\lim_{x\to a+0}f(x) = \alpha.\]
■


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Birth process

-
Image
  Defining the birth process  Consider a colony of bacteria that never dies. We study the following process known as  the birth process , also known as  the Yule process . The colony starts with \(n_0\) cells at time \(t = 0\). Assume that the probability that any individual cell divides in the time interval \((t, t + \delta t)\) is proportional to \(\delta t\) for small \(\delta t\). Further assume that each cell division is independent of others. Let \(\lambda\) be the  birth rate.  The probability of a cell division for a population of \(n\) cells during \(\delta t\) is \(\lambda n \delta t\). We assume that the probability that two or more births take place in the time interval \(\delta t\) is \(o(\delta t)\). That is, it can be ignored. Consequently, the probability that no cell divides during \(\delta t\) is \(1 - \lambda n \delta t - o(\delta t)\). Note that this process is an example of the Markov chain with states \({n_0}, {n_0 + 1}, {n_0 + 2}...
Read more

Informal introduction to formal logic

-
Image
 In mathematics, we must prove (almost) everything and the proofs must be done logically and rigorously. Therefore, we need some understanding of basic logic. Here, I will informally explain some rudimentary formal logic. Definitions (Proposition): A proposition is a statement that is either true or false. "True" and "false" are called the truth values, and are often denoted \(\top\) and \(\bot\). Here is an example. "Dr. Akira teaches at UBD." is a statement that is either true or false (we understand the existence of Dr. Akira and UBD), hence a proposition. The following statement is also a proposition, although we don't know if it's true or false (yet): Any even number greater than or equal to 4 is equal to a sum of two primes. See also: Goldbach's conjecture   Next, we define several operations on propositions. Note that propositions combined with these operations are again propositions.   (Conjunction, logical "and"):  Let \(P\)...
Read more

Taylor's theorem for multivariate functions

-
Image
Taylor's theorem As we have seen in a previous post, the essence of differentiation is a linear approximation.  See also: Partial and total differentiation of multivariate functions Given a totally differentiable function \(z = f(x,y)\), we have in the neighbor of \(P = (a,b)\), \[f(x,y) = f(a,b) + f_x(a,b)(x - a) + f_y(a,b)(y - b) + o(\|X - P\|)\] where \(X = (x,y).\) By discarding the higher order terms \(o(\|X - P\|)\), we have the equation of the tangent plane at \(P\): \[z = f(a,b) + f_x(a,b)(x - a) + f_y(a,b)(y - b)\] that gives the linear approximation of \(z = f(x,y)\) around the point \(P\). But we may obtain better approximations by looking into the details of \(o(\|X - P\|)\), that is, by incorporating higher-order derivatives. Just as in the univariate case, we have a multivariate version of Taylor's theorem, which can be stated concisely and proved easily by using differential operators. See also: Differential operators Theorem (Taylor's theorem) Let \(f(x,y)...
Read more