Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I came upon this question in a GRE Math Subject Test Preparation book (REA).

In the $(\epsilon, \delta)$ definition of limit, $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to c} f(x) = L$, let $f(x) = x^3 + 3x^2 - x + 1$ and let $c = 2$. Find the least upper bound on $\delta$ so that $f(x)$ is bounded within $\epsilon$ of $L$ for all sufficiently small $\epsilon > 0$.

(A) $\frac{\epsilon}{3}$ (B) $\frac{\epsilon}{23}$ (C) $\frac{\epsilon^3}{4}$ (D) $\frac{\epsilon^2}{16}$ (E) $\frac{\epsilon}{19}$

The "explanation" given in the book is:

This is very tedious by direct means, but generally the bound is $\frac{\epsilon}{|f'(c)|}$ when f is differentiable and $f'(c) \neq 0$, on an interval containing c. In this case, $f'(2) = 23$.

Could someone explain why $\frac{\epsilon}{|f'(c)|}$ works, or if there is a better way to do the question?

Update: I've been reading Calculus by Spivak where he finds the limits of polynomials (4th ed, pg. 92-93) and I feel like I have some more intuition.

Let $|x - 2| < u$. By the triangle inequality, $|x| < u + 2$, which implies that $|x^2 + 5x + 9| < (u + 2)^2 + 5 (u + 2) + 9$

Since $f(x) - 19 = (x - 2)(x^2 + 5x + 9)$. If we consider $\delta = \min\left(u,\frac{\epsilon}{(u + 2)^2 + 5 (u + 2) + 9}\right)$, then $|x - 2| < \delta$ implies that $|f(x) - 19| < \epsilon$.

Now if we consider the set $\left\{\min\left(u,\frac{\epsilon}{(u + 2)^2 + 5 (u + 2) + 9}\right) \colon u > 0\right\}$, then the supremum is something like

$\min\left(0,\frac{\epsilon}{(0 + 2)^2 + 5 (0 + 2) + 9}\right) = \min\left(0,\frac{\epsilon}{23}\right)$.

$\lim_{x \to 2} (x^2 + 5x + 9) =\lim_{x \to 2} \frac{f(x) - 19}{x - 2} = f'(2)$

This still feels very imprecise. Is there a more rigorous explanation?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

By the mean value theorem $|f(x)-L|=|x-c|\cdot f'(\xi)$ for some $\xi$ between $x$ and $c$. If $\epsilon, \delta$ are small then $f'(\xi)\approx f'(c)$ for all $\xi\in (c-\delta,c+\delta)$ and hence $|x-c|<\frac \epsilon{|f'(c)|}$ implies $|f(x)-L|\stackrel <\approx \epsilon $.

Or to put it differently: Near $c$ the function $f(x)$ approximately looks like $g(x)=f(c)+(x-c)f'(c)$ and for $g$ it is clear that $\delta=\frac \epsilon{|f'(c)|}$ is the best choice.


Let's make the above rigorous:

We are given an open interval $I\subseteq \mathbb R$ and a continuoiusly differentiable function $f\colon I\to \mathbb R$ and a point $c\in I$ and with $f'(c)\ne 0$.

Consider the set $$\mathcal D = \{h\colon (0,\infty)\to(0,\infty)\mid\forall\epsilon>0\colon\forall x\in I\colon |x-c|<h(\epsilon)\Rightarrow |f(x)-f(c)|<\epsilon\}.$$ Then $\mathcal D$ contains all functions that one is allowed to use for finding a suitable $\delta$, given $\epsilon$ in determining $\lim_{x\to c}f(x)$. Unfortunately, there is no natural order relation on $\mathcal D$, hence it is not immediatel clear how to apply terms like "least upper bound" to $\mathcal D$. However, we have a partial order (not only on $\mathcal D$, but on the set of all functions $(0,\infty)\to(0,\infty)$) as we can define $h_1\le h_2$ if $\limsup_{x\to 0}\frac{h_1(x)}{h_2(x)}\le 1$.

Let $H(x)=\frac x{|f'(c)|}$ and $\tilde h(\epsilon)=\inf\{|x-c|\mid |f(x)-f(c)|\ge\epsilon\}$. Note that in general $H\notin \mathcal D$. We prove the following statements:

  1. $\tilde h\in\mathcal D$
  2. If $h\in \mathcal D$ then $H\ge h$
  3. $\tilde h\ge H$

These three statements together allow us to loosely speak of $H(\epsilon)$ being an approximation to the maximal possible choice of $\delta$ for sufficiently small $\epsilon$.

Lemma 1: $\tilde h\in\mathcal D$.

Proof: Since $f$ is continuous, for $\epsilon>0$ there exists $\delta>0$ such that $|x-c|<\delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(c)|<\epsilon$. We conclude that $\tilde h(\epsilon)\ge \delta>0$, hence $h$ is indeed a function $(0,\infty)\to (0,\infty)$. If $\epsilon>0$ is given and $|x-c|<\tilde h(\epsilon)$, then $|f(x)-f(c)|<\epsilon$, as otherwise we would have $\tilde h(\epsilon)\le |x-c|$. Therefore $\tilde h \in \mathcal D$.$_\blacksquare$

Lemma 2: If $h\in \mathcal D$ then $H\ge h$.

Proof: We have to show that for $\epsilon>0$ there exists $\delta>0$ such that $0<x<\delta$ implies $\frac{H(x)}{h(x)}>1-\epsilon$, i.e. $H(x)>h(x)(1-\epsilon)$. I am a bit too tired for these calculations right now, so I will add them tomorrow - one has to be careful not to mix $\epsilon, \delta$ belonging to the $\limsup$ with those belonging to $h$ or the continuity of $f$.

Lemma 3: $\tilde h\ge H$.

Proof: Same here, see you tomorrow.

share|improve this answer
    
@BrianM.Scott Thanks for pointing me the correct englich name –  Hagen von Eitzen Sep 26 '12 at 19:30
    
Mittelwertsatz and Zwischenwertsatz, right? The only way I can keep them straight is match Zwischen- with intermediate, because Mittel- sounds as if it could go with either. –  Brian M. Scott Sep 26 '12 at 19:37
    
I appreciate the intuition of thinking about the linear approximation, but I'm hoping to find a more rigorous explanation. –  user42776 Sep 27 '12 at 20:07

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.