1
$\begingroup$

I know when you wanna prove that the limit of some function like $f(x)$ at $a$ exists you must prove a proposition of the following form:

$$(\forall \varepsilon >0)(\exists \ \delta >0)(0<|x-a|<\delta \ \Rightarrow \ |f(x)-l|<\varepsilon )$$

But what if you wanna prove that the limit of $f$ at $a$ does not exist. Do I need to negate the above expression and then reach it by recursive reasoning? Then what really is the negation of this expression? Should it lead to non-uniqueness of $l$?

Moreover I know that "Infinite limits" -which are limits with a value of infinity- are also classified as non-existent limits. Then how could we prove they don't exist using $\varepsilon$ and $\delta$?

Thank you in advance.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You need to show that $\exists \epsilon>0, \forall \delta>0, \exists x_1, x_2 : |x_n-a|<\delta \text { and } |f(x_1)- f(x_2)| > 2\epsilon$ $\endgroup$
    – Doug M
    Jan 12 '17 at 19:24
  • $\begingroup$ An example $\endgroup$
    – gebruiker
    Jan 12 '17 at 19:36
4
$\begingroup$

In practice what you do is pick a convenient epsilon and show that for the epsilon you pick there is no delta satisfying the implication.

For example, if $f$ is the function $x \mapsto {1\over x}$ as a function $f:(0,1) \to \mathbb R$ and you want to show that the limit towards $0$ does not exist then you might start by picking $\varepsilon = 1$.

Then your goal is to show that for every $\delta$ you can find $x\in (-\delta, \delta)$ such that $|f(x)|>1$.

So let $\delta>0$. Then you can find $n \in \mathbb N$ with ${1\over n}<\delta$ and $n>1$. Letting $x={1\over n}$ you get $|f({1\over n})| = n > 1$.

$\endgroup$

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.