I state the exercise:

Given $f: [0, + \infty) \rightarrow R$, f continuous.

Prove that if $\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x) = \lambda$, where $\lambda \in R$ then $f$ is uniformly continuous.

My solution:

I know that for an $M > 0$ we have that $\forall{x} > M \implies |f(x) - \lambda|< \epsilon/2$.

Now any $x_1, x_2 \in [0, +\infty)$ can lie either both in $[0,M]$ or both in $(M, \infty)$ or one in each of the aforementioned intervals.

  1. In the first case we can invoke the Heine-cantor theorem that proves the function is uniformly continuous.

  2. In the second case we have that $|f(x_1) - \lambda| < \epsilon/2$ and $|f(x_2) - \lambda| < \epsilon/2$ this implies that $|f(x_1) - f(x_2) | < \epsilon$ by a case by case analisis.

  3. In addition we can reduce the third case to the first case by choosing $M_1 = \max \{x_1, x_2 \} + 1$, because $\forall{x} >M_1 > M$ we still have the implication needed for the second case, i.e., that $|f(x) - \lambda|< \epsilon/2$.

I have a different solution to the third case but was wondering if this would suffice? In any case, is my solution correct? any other ways of doing this? points where I need to be preciser?

PS: Ah I had a doubt during the exercise that I was never explicitly finding the $\delta > 0$ s.t. $|x_1 - x_2| < \delta \implies |f(x_1) - f(x_2) | < \epsilon$. I think in the second case any $\delta$ would do, correct?

  • $\begingroup$ You also have to check what happen when $x<M<y$. $\endgroup$ – Surb Mar 5 '16 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Surb I am trying to reduce that case to the first case by choosing the M again? maybe I can't do this. $\endgroup$ – Monolite Mar 5 '16 at 13:18
  • $\begingroup$ @Byron Schmuland Will this be true when 0 will not be included in the domain of f ? $\endgroup$ – sani May 17 '17 at 14:52

An easy way to do this is to circumvent the problem that $x_1 \in [0,M]$ and $x_2 \in (M,\infty)$ by choosing $\delta$ which traps them both in one of the sets. To do this, we need to make the sets overlap a bit, but that is no problem.

Let $\varepsilon > 0$ and choose $M > 0$ such that for $x > M$ we have $$\lvert f(x) - \lambda \rvert < \varepsilon / 2.$$ Since $f$ is continuous and $[0,M+1]$ is compact, we know that $f$ is uniformly continuous there. Hence there is $\delta_1 > 0$ such that for all $x_1, x_2 \in [0,M+1]$ we have $$\lvert f(x_1) - f(x_2) \rvert < \varepsilon.$$ Also, for any $x_1, x_2 \in (M, \infty)$ we have $$\lvert f(x_1) - f(x_2) \rvert \le \lvert f(x_1) - \lambda \rvert + \lvert f(x_2) - \lambda \rvert < \varepsilon /2 + \varepsilon/2 = \varepsilon.$$ Choose $\delta = \min \{\delta_1, \tfrac 1 2 \}$. Then for any $x_1, x_2 \in [0,\infty)$ such that $\lvert x_1 - x_2 \rvert < \delta$, we must have that $$x_1,x_2 \in [0,M+1] \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, \text{ or } \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, x_1,x_2 \in (M,\infty).$$ Indeed, we may have both, but the point is, we've 'eliminated' this case where $x_1 \in [0,M]$ and $x_2 \in (M,\infty)$. In either case, as we have already noted, we have $\lvert f(x_1) - f(x_2) \rvert < \varepsilon$. Since this $\delta$ depends only on $\varepsilon$ (not on $x_1$ or $x_2$), this shows that $f$ is uniformly continuous.

  • $\begingroup$ Will this remain true when $f: (0, + \infty) \rightarrow R$, and f is continuous ..??@User8128 $\endgroup$ – sani May 17 '17 at 14:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Are you asking if you can exclude the endpoint so that it is $(0,\infty)$ rather than $[0,\infty)$? If this is your question, the answer is no, it is no longer true. For example, take $f: (0,\infty) \to \mathbb R$ to be defined $f(x) = 1/x$, $x \in (0,\infty)$. This function is continuous on $(0,\infty)$ and has a finite limit at $\infty$ but is not uniformly continuous. A crucial part of the proof invoked that fact that $[0,M+1]$ is compact, and we cannot do this if it is replaced with $(0, M+1]$. $\endgroup$ – User8128 May 17 '17 at 15:06
  • $\begingroup$ Will $sin (x \sin x)$ be uniformly Continuous or not???????????@User8128 Although this question not relevant to the given question...Can u give me a hint?? $\endgroup$ – sani May 17 '17 at 15:33
  • $\begingroup$ Unrelated questions should be posted separately. If you give proper context and show that you have put in some effort, it will be answered. $\endgroup$ – User8128 May 17 '17 at 17:21
  • $\begingroup$ Sir Actually I am blocked. I can not ask question. Can u plzz help me?@User8128 $\endgroup$ – sani May 19 '17 at 1:19

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.