7
$\begingroup$

I am doing a question (q-39 from ch 2.4- Stewart's Calculus) that asks me to prove that for the function

$$f(x)=\begin{cases} 0, & \text{if } x \text{ is rational} \\ 1, & \text{if } x \text{ is irrational} \end{cases}$$

the $\lim_{x\to 0}f(x)$ does not exist.

I am stuck because I have not dealt with the limits of conditional functions using delta epsilon. I understand that the start of the proof would be to assume $|f(x)-L|<\epsilon$. However the solution set suggests that it follows that $\epsilon=1/2$. How do I get $\epsilon=1/2$ from $|f(x)-L|<\epsilon$?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Just think of it this way: No matter how small rational (or irrational) number you choose, there is always a smaller irrational ( or rational respectively) number. $\endgroup$ – glip-glop Dec 17 '15 at 11:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So $\epsilon=1/2$ was just a number that the authors decided to plug in to see whether the limit would work? $\endgroup$ – A nobody Dec 17 '15 at 11:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, you are right. Since the definition goes like "For $\epsilon > 0$, there is a $\delta \dots$", so we one can choose $\epsilon = {1 \over 2}$ $\endgroup$ – glip-glop Dec 17 '15 at 11:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Anobody Yes, this was a choice between $0$ and $1$, the two values of $f$. Any $ε$ between $0$ and $1$ would do, but $ε=1/2$ is a "simple choice". $ε=0.9$ or $3=1/4$ would be the same. $\endgroup$ – Jimmy R. Dec 17 '15 at 11:41
3
$\begingroup$

Ok, not $ε-δ$ but $\lim_{x\to0}\sup f(x)=1$, $\lim_{x\to0}\inf f(x)=0$.


To prove it with $ε-δ$, see here:

To show that the function is not continuous at $0$, we need to find an $ε$ such that no matter how small we choose $δ$, there will be points $z$ within $δ$ of $0$ such that $f(z)$ is not within $ε$ of $f(0) = 0$. In fact, $ε=1/2$ is such an $ε$. Because the irrational numbers are dense in the reals, no matter what $δ$ we choose we can always find an irrational $z$ within $δ$ of $0$, and $f(z) = 1$ is at least $1/2$ away from $0$.

Still, quoting from the above link:

In less rigorous terms, between any two irrationals, there is a rational, and vice versa.

So $ε=1/2$ is just a choice. Any choice of $0<ε<1$ would do, but $ε=1/2$ is simple.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Let us argue by contradiction; let $L := \lim_{x \to 0}f(x)$ exist. If $L \leq 0$, then $|f(x) - L| > |L|$ for all irrational $x$; if $L \geq 1$, then $|f(x) - L| > |L-1|$ for all rational $x$. Hence we suppose $0 < L < 1$. Then there is some $\delta > 0$ such that $0 < |x| < \delta$ implies $$ |f(x) - L| < \min \{ L, 1-L \}/2, $$ which is impossible (why?).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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